# Shut down to correction



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

I know given in a perfect world, we would all have great working dogs. However, all of us face some problems when working with their dogs. And being most of us, at least in our club, we are just amateur trying to have fun with our dogs, some of us did not get our dogs for the purpose of working in the first place.... ok, now that I am done with the opening, "please don't tell me to get rid of the dog" clause, here is the story 

One of our club members own a Doberman. He, in my opinion, is not really suitable for working, but he is what she has, and she is willing to work him, so our Trainer (not me... I only see the problem and wonder what to do if I am training such a dog) puts in the effort as well. He started out with the lowest drive I ever seen in a Doberman, and after months of drive-building :mrgreen:, we saw great improvements. He is weak in nerves and that, to me,this is genetics and I think that will be his limiting factor, but I and We are just curious where will be the limit for this dog?

He is ok with obedience work but not great. He knows all the commands. Today, while training, the handler corrected him for a couple of mistakes and he shut down. After that, the drive in this dog is just gone! Zero! Nothing can make him do anything anymore! He just lay down on the field and look at you! The handler trained him with clicker as well as using a pinch collar.

So my question is anyone has experience with this and how can we get pass this hurdle with this dog (besides throwing it away)? Should we just go back to the basics and work on obedience using positive methods and use no compulsions? What about the mistakes the dog made? How to correct with no compulsion? Looking forward to any advise...thanks .


----------



## Ted Efthymiadis (Apr 3, 2009)

It can be done, but you really need to be a pro to do it. 

I'm a HUGE fan of the e-collar, when used by a pro. I'v seen and taken dogs who are like this to an entirely different level because of the collar.

I will say that most trainers use the collar as a method of correction, and that fine to do with some dogs, but it can also be used as a motivator if the remote is in the right hands.

It's also a great way to communicate with the dog without having to give a pop with a pinch collar.

Don't use it if your not a pro on this type of case, you'll do more damage than good, however if you are lucky enough to find a solid e-collar trainer in your area, I would get on board and see what they can do.


----------



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

Ted Efthymiadis said:


> It can be done, but you really need to be a pro to do it.
> 
> I'm a HUGE fan of the e-collar, when used by a pro. I'v seen and taken dogs who are like this to an entirely different level because of the collar.
> 
> ...


Thanks Ted. Yes, in fact I trained my dogs on ecollar with a couple of friends/ trainers from "Sit means Sit" a couple of years ago. And I am a fan of ecollar as a motivator as well. I think in this case, if the dog "sees" that the stimulation is a result of his action and not a delivery of correction by the handler, it may not only get the dog be more responsive but also improve the "bond" between the handler and dog.

The only problem I see here is that I think it will be harder to convince her the benefits of ecollar. Her eyes were pretty wide (with fear!? :-o) when I mentioned that the use of ecollar could be a way. And I don' think she wants me to experiment with her dog [-X and my trainer is worried about doing more damage. I don' think he has a good knowledge of ecollar usage and there are no solid e-collar trainer around here.

I am here to see if there are any feasible alternatives... thanks.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

You cannot make a water boy into a football player...You cannot install something in the dog that is not there. That's just the truth....No changing that. I know you said you did want to hear that. But at some point your friend is going to have to be honest with themselves. If the dog does not want to be there bad enough....there is nothing you can do to make them do it. The dog simply does not give a shit. The dog is telling you everything you need to know about the dog.

If you were able to get the dog back. I would simply use withholding reward as punishment....forever. The risk of having the dog shutdown is to great and to easy to do.

To get the dog back, I would just have the handler put no collars on him, and just go for walks off leash and let the dog be free. and not at the field. Maybe after a few walks try throwing the ball once, or play a second of tug. I would do this till the dog is back. Then go back to the field....and just walk, do the ball thing no OB, nothing. till the dog shows some interest to get on the field. I would do whatever I thought would make the dog associate the field to good things. I would keep it short, and fun. 

Then when I had that....start with one....one command and then just play ball. I would let the dog get away with a lot at first. I mean if the dog bit me to get the toy... I would not say a word. If the dog laid down when I said sit, I would reward. Who cares if the dog is correct, you got nothing if he just sits there. Then I would start marking the wrong the responses with an unemotional no and make himdo it again. and when your resetting, keep it as if the dog were a five year old learning to spell....I would be silly, and talk to them like I would talk to a little child, like noooooo silly, try again...all in a playful voice. A dog like this, I do not think you have to be worried about them going out of control with drive....I think keeping the dog interested is going to be the battle. I would do whatever the dog wants to do.

If you look at it like this. If you were my friend, and I like to go play baseball, and you always went to play basketball and when hung out never gave me a choice but to play basketball and when I messed up you yelled at me, or tried to correct me....Well, I wouldn't hang with you long. I would be thinking you should just be glad I am here.I would also think...some friend you are, you want me to be something I am not for your benefit. But if you played baseball sometimes with me, and then asked me to come play basketball...I would be way more inclined to go with you, and when we got there. you let me make mistakes and just have fun. It would not be so boring....but chances are, I am never going to really like basketball. You can try....but my heart is in baseball.


I think if you really want the dog to never work again...use an e-collar. Per Mike Ellis, Whom I think has a clue. E-collars work because the stims stand out in the dogs mind....unlike anything else they ever felt. If the dog is that senstive to a pinch...An E-collar makes absolultley no sense. I am sure I have ever seen a dog motivated to get a stim from a collar. You can only use the E-collar as an avoidance tool. Either the dog is working to get the stim...which I doubt. Or they work to avoid it. And this dog's response to avoid something is to do nothing and shutoff. The dog is telling you everything you need to know about what the dog can handle. 

There are 2 basic reasons dogs work....gain access to pleasure or avoid pain....and the dog decides what is pleasurable and what is pain.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I get what you mean by motivate with the E-collar...I re-read your post. But I think this dog is just way to sensitive. I think this dog would give a shit where the stim is coming from....He would just shut off in paralyzing fear.

My first Malinois was like this. I got him back by trying to be his friend, teach him training was safe and fun for him. And being honest with myself that he would never be a dog worthy of showing. But I got some good work out of him, and it was a great training accomplishment for me.


----------



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

Thanks James. Your view on ecollar is the point I was worried about as well since it is not my dog and I do not know it enough. But your point here is clear. I appreciate it.

I will see if we will talk about this issue again in the next training and incorporate some of your advise.

Thanks.


----------



## Geoff Empey (Jan 8, 2008)

I read this link today and found it quite interesting and timely for your friends Doberman. 

The title is ... When it all goes wrong .. how to respond to failure. It's a great read. 

http://www.clickertraining.com/node/2465?source=fbfp


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Although an excellent tool I think the e-collar is abused more then anything else in dog training. 
My own thoughts on this dog is go motivational. With that it even sounds like the dog's drive for food or toy is zilch.
As someone mentioned above, the e-collar is fantastic...in the right hands.
I'll follow this by saying I'm not a big fan or even qualifyed when it comes to working soft, low drive dogs. 
As with most who attempt to train dogs, everyone has limitations/faults. This is my biggie!


----------



## Molly Graf (Jul 20, 2006)

I agree with Bob, don't put any sort of force on this dog, and don't use the e-collar - if the person wants to continue working with this dog, keep building drive in play/prey, keep training her with motivation, make everything fun, and the person might really learn some great things from this dog, that he can use for his next dog that may be better suited for the sport or whatever he wants to do with the dog. Have fun with it, and the dog needs to also have fun or it won't work. Good luck!

molly


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Geoff Empey said:


> I read this link today and found it quite interesting and timely for your friends Doberman.
> 
> The title is ... When it all goes wrong .. how to respond to failure. It's a great read.
> 
> http://www.clickertraining.com/node/2465?source=fbfp


Awesome....I think this one of the best skills to obtain...and one I have yet to master. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Good post Jeff. I missed that until I read James's post. 
My comment about motivational training should read marker training. I run the two together as one and the same.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Molly Graf said:


> I agree with Bob, don't put any sort of force on this dog, and don't use the e-collar - if the person wants to continue working with this dog, keep building drive in play/prey, keep training her with motivation, make everything fun, and the person might really learn some great things from this dog, that he can use for his next dog that may be better suited for the sport or whatever he wants to do with the dog. Have fun with it, and the dog needs to also have fun or it won't work. Good luck!
> 
> molly


 
I second this, I removed my use of corrective collars for a summer with the advice of another trainer....he said it would make me think. I learned more in that summer than I did in all the years of training I had before. 

This could be a blessing, and not a curse. It made me learn how to get the dog to work with me.


----------



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

Thanks everyone for advises. I find it hard to break news to people that their dog is not going to make the cut. I find it hard even accepting that my dog is not going to make it, but I have to accept the truth.

Either way, I am going to raise these few suggestions and see what she (the handler) thinks... and I think at the very least, we all will learn some lessons here.

Again, thanks everyone.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Sonny Lee said:


> Thanks everyone for advises. I find it hard to break news to people that their dog is not going to make the cut. I find it hard even accepting that my dog is not going to make it, but I have to accept the truth.
> 
> Either way, I am going to raise these few suggestions and see what she (the handler) thinks... and I think at the very least, we all will learn some lessons here.
> 
> Again, thanks everyone.



Sonny,

Truth like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
As far as Dobermanns, I've trained a few and managed to HOT two to SchH III.
Dobermanns are highly intelligent and don't respond well to the typical cookie cutter GSD Schutzhund training.
Dobermanns are also handler sensitive and don't respond well to corrections when they don't understand the exercise they are being corrected for OR think the correction is unfair.
Corrections in this case should follow the First Law of Holes
(when you find yourself in a hole....stop digging) If the dog is
shutting down...stop the corrections! Start building a relationship based on operant conditioning. Forget about e-collars in this application. Just because a decoy/TD is going
through "drive building" exercises doesn't mean he is "building drive" in any particular dog. Have your club mate
drop me an email at [email protected] if she wants specific suggestions on what to try with her Dobermanmann. Hopefully it is a working line Dobermann
at least.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Sonny Lee said:


> I know given in a perfect world, we would all have great working dogs. However, all of us face some problems when working with their dogs. And being most of us, at least in our club, we are just amateur trying to have fun with our dogs, some of us did not get our dogs for the purpose of working in the first place.... ok, now that I am done with the opening, "please don't tell me to get rid of the dog" clause, here is the story
> 
> One of our club members own a Doberman. He, in my opinion, is not really suitable for working, but he is what she has, and she is willing to work him, so our Trainer (not me... I only see the problem and wonder what to do if I am training such a dog) puts in the effort as well. He started out with the lowest drive I ever seen in a Doberman, and after months of drive-building :mrgreen:, we saw great improvements. He is weak in nerves and that, to me,this is genetics and I think that will be his limiting factor, but I and We are just curious where will be the limit for this dog?
> 
> ...


This can be dealt with through escape training. Not fun for trainer or dog, but effective. Essentially teach the dog that shut-down = pain. Dog stops shutting down. It MUST be paired with SKILLED marker training to avaoid unneccessary shutting down.

I'd stop training the dog. It's unfair to the dog to force it to do something it isn't really able to do.


----------



## Butch Cappel (Aug 12, 2007)

Sonny these are the dogs that have been my bread and butter over the years and after hundreds of them, I don't believe in lost cause dogs anymore. I also don't know how effective advice without observation is, but I'll give this one a try. 

First as sensitive as Dobes can be I wondered about your statement that the owner used a prong collar and a clicker for training. Without seeing that first hand I do not really know, but reading it almost sounds contradictory, as one is a compulsion technique and the other is a reward based technique. It makes me wonder if confusion may not have been created in the dogs early learning process? That is only a question not a statement.

For confidence building of the dog I use two things, agility and sack work. By agility I do not mean the blue and gold regulation stuff. I am talking about jumps, both high and broad, and other obstacles of any kind. It seems that this gives the handler a chance to ask an action of the dog, it is one that the dog can succeed at, and that gives the owner the chance to award the dog for success. As it also requires some physical effort it seems to instill some confidence in the dog.

Next I use a lot of sack work. If dogs have a confidence problem pushing them to take on a sleeved or suited man in a fight is not likely to be successful. A sack can be presented with a long rope, or swung out by one hand, whatever it takes to diminish stress and increase desire in the dog.

If you then incrementally increase the fight needed for the dog to win, as you also close the distance of the decoy, the dogs confidence will grow with each session. I use two indicators to gauge the progress of the dog.
Can the decoy pull their front feet off the ground, and they maintain the fight? Will the dog growl or aggressively vocalize as the decoy pulls them up and looms over them? With these two markers the dog is ready. 

These two techniques also give the owner a clear mark of success. That means they can give the dog a clear, positive response to indicate success. That understanding of accomplishment will build the dog. 

The most valuable dog training advice I ever got was from Doug Deacon, a SchH and Police dog trainer, who told me _"when any thing goes wrong take two steps back, then start over"._ Sort of like that article when Steve White wrote; _Instead, my answer to any of the “what to do” questions above is simple—go back and train some more. The error demonstrates that the skill is not sufficiently internalized._

Sorry I took so long to say this, but I was taught that the only limitations to a dogs potential are the human at the other end of the leash. If they are smarter than the dog they're training the dog will be successful.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

I'll be the Lone Ranger here. I think that the Ecollar used as I advocate, is the ideal tool for this dog. 

But that method is not as others have described. I've not seen anyone describe their use of the Ecollar except as simply a correction tool, used to inflict discomfort when the dog disobeys. But perhaps I missed it. Those who say that the Ecollar is used _"to motivate"_ their dog are merely replacing the motivation of a leash correction (in that the dog "is motivated" to avoid it) with the discomfort that an Ecollar brings. I would not use the tool in that fashion for this dog. 

My method does not do this at the basic levels of training and so the result is different. I'd suggest taking a look at one of my protocols (HERE'S one for the recall). The difference between doing this and correcting for misbehavior should be obvious. 

I've come across some highly reactive, highly sensitive dogs and the Ecollar has been the answer for them. The key is to stop thinking of it as a corrective tool and start thinking of it as a tool for teaching with. 

Oh and BTW, one _"needn't be a pro"_ to do this.


----------



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

Anne Vaini said:


> I'd stop training the dog. It's unfair to the dog to force it to do something it isn't really able to do.


Hi Anne, I know what you mean here, but many times, especially for owners like us and "part-time" trainers, we do not really have the will to accept that our dog cannot do it. I have a dog which I retire from training because he is just not making it in the field and rather be at home. Now, I am left with no dog (actually I am waiting for my puppy [-o<...but that's another thread), but luckily I get to train with all the dogs in the culb as a decoy.

And it is hard to tell another handler that their dog is crap... whether or not it is the truth.... maybe someone will be able to do, but not me. I don't see myself that good enough to judge another handler's dog. Also, there maybe a chance it is the handler's problem and not the dog's limitation... and no one really knows. It is like I going up to tell another parent that their daughter should not be in this beauty contest because she is ugly!... 

However, I really appreciate all your input. In the very least, it lets me look at training from different perspective. And hopefully I will be better when it comes to my own puppy in the future.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Let us know the route of training the trainer chooses and the results.

And I had a similar dog, I had to let go of in terms of hopes of training him for SchH. Maybe someone else could have gotten him to work, But I sure could not have. And Ethically, For me, and I do not try push my ethics on others. That's not entirely true...since my ethics are apart of who I am, Sometimes it does come out. But For the most part, I try to keep training, training and ethics, ethics...But there are things I am not willing to do to score points.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

quit with the OB for awhile and just play fetch with the dog. Go hiking and just become buds with him again. Then introduce OB again with things he knows very well. The dog will be back working in no time.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Sonny Lee said:


> Hi Anne, I know what you mean here, but many times, especially for owners like us and "part-time" trainers, we do not really have the will to accept that our dog cannot do it. I have a dog which I retire from training because he is just not making it in the field and rather be at home. Now, I am left with no dog (actually I am waiting for my puppy [-o<...but that's another thread), but luckily I get to train with all the dogs in the culb as a decoy.
> 
> And it is hard to tell another handler that their dog is crap... whether or not it is the truth.... maybe someone will be able to do, but not me. I don't see myself that good enough to judge another handler's dog. Also, there maybe a chance it is the handler's problem and not the dog's limitation... and no one really knows. It is like I going up to tell another parent that their daughter should not be in this beauty contest because she is ugly!...
> 
> However, I really appreciate all your input. In the very least, it lets me look at training from different perspective. And hopefully I will be better when it comes to my own puppy in the future.


I guess I say it because I have wasted years of my life on dogs that aren't good enough. Yes, improvement is possible. There are two ways to go about it. Dance circles around the dog to try to prevent it from shutting down, or teach the dog that shutting down is not an option. Either way, it sucks to be the dog and it sucks to be the trainer.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Anne Vaini said:


> I guess I say it because I have wasted years of my life on dogs that aren't good enough. Yes, improvement is possible. There are two ways to go about it. Dance circles around the dog to try to prevent it from shutting down, or teach the dog that shutting down is not an option. Either way, it sucks to be the dog and it sucks to be the trainer.


Anne,

Maybe it was the training that "wasn't good enough" and not the dog? You don't have to "dance circles around the dog"
What you need to do is THINK. Why is the dog shutting down what am I doing wrong. I guarantee motivating the dog to do something is easier and more effective then trying to force them. The owner needs to build (or repair) her relationship with her dog. 
An e-collar is NOT the tool for this problem. I don't care what "protocol" you use


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Anne,
> 
> Maybe it was the training that "wasn't good enough" and not the dog? You don't have to "dance circles around the dog"
> What you need to do is THINK. Why is the dog shutting down what am I doing wrong. I guarantee motivating the dog to do something is easier and more effective then trying to force them. The owner needs to build (or repair) her relationship with her dog.
> An e-collar is NOT the tool for this problem. I don't care what "protocol" you use


Ahh... but it was an abused puppy-mill puppy that was written off for euthanasia at only 4 months old. Cross your eyes wrong and the dog shuts down. I danced circles around the dog for 3 years until I finally taught her that shutting down was an extremely uncomfortable option. After that, we were golden. Did this with another dog - nervy as all hell AND abused, then locked in an outdoor kennel for 2 years afterwards. Both dogs went on to incedible things - they are both stunt dogs.

I get what you're saying though. I have a handler-sensitive dog that shuts down in certain situations and it's just a bad time to train. No big deal.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> The owner needs to build (or repair) her relationship with her dog.


And the Ecollar is the perfect tool to use for this with a handler sensitive dog. Teaching the recall shows the dog that merely being close to the handler _"keeps him safe"_ from discomfort. When you add this to other methods used to build a relationship with a dog, you get very fast results. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> An e-collar is NOT the tool for this problem. I don't care what "protocol" you use


The Ecollar is the perfect tool for this problem. Due to the nature of the stim as NOT coming from the handler, the dog comes to believe that it comes from his behavior. He is responsible for what happens to him. No other tool gives this. Once a dog that is overly sensitive to handler corrections stops making an association between the handler and the correction he's much more likely to perform well. 

People who make comments of this nature, that how the tool is used makes no difference, really have no idea of the possibilities. Just because some people don't know how to use an Ecollar for this issue doesn't mean that it can't be used. It just means that THEY are incapable of it.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> And the Ecollar is the perfect tool to use for this with a handler sensitive dog. Teaching the recall shows the dog that merely being close to the handler _"keeps him safe"_ from discomfort. When you add this to other methods used to build a relationship with a dog, you get very fast results.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a risky endeavor. Look I do not mean to be rude. But the rest of us are not dumb shits with no experience or knowledge. I can see how flooding in theory can make a dog work...but what kind of life is that. I would keep working in the sweat shop too, if the boss hit E-collar everytime I slowed down. But I guarntee even if the dog did get it, and start to work to avoid the shock believing he is making it happen...if he ever gets wise to the colllar...your screwed. That's if the dog does not just go hide under a tree, and blow his anal glands instead. Also, the prediction that the dog is going to associate the stim to his behavior is just that...a prediction. He could relate it to the collar he has on his neck, the field he his on, the mere presence of his handler. A dog that shows this strong of a response to a pinch collar....no telling what will happen with an E-collar. I am not so sure the dog even cares the pinch collar is activated by the handler...seems to me the dog is just thinking...holy shit what was that? Even good dogs have adverse reactions to an E-collar. And what does the handler do to correct those problems....more e-collar. Soon the dog learns, there simply is no escape from the E-collar, it's coming no matter what I do...and even when I get this behavior right. It's just going to come one the next. There are whole lotta things to think about when choosing to employ an E-collar, not if it will just solve the problem at hand. I do use an E-collar and have had good results, I have also ****ed a dog that was less than for the rest of his life with one. The E-collar in the hands of a person who used a pinch with the result of a dog shutting down...is a recipe for disaster. I am no E-collar guru....But I have never heard a trainer who has had success with E-collar training state a begginer need not be a pro to have success with it. In fact, I have heard them say what I just said. If your going to use it, you better be damn sure you know what your doing.


----------



## Ted Efthymiadis (Apr 3, 2009)

James Downey said:


> That's a risky endeavor. Look I do not mean to be rude. But the rest of us are not dumb shits with no experience or knowledge. I can see how flooding in theory can make a dog work...but what kind of life is that. I would keep working in the sweat shop too, if the boss hit E-collar everytime I slowed down. But I guarntee even if the dog did get it, and start to work to avoid the shock believing he is making it happen...if he ever gets wise to the colllar...your screwed. That's if the dog does not just go hide under a tree, and blow his anal glands instead. Also, the prediction that the dog is going to associate the stim to his behavior is just that...a prediction. He could relate it to the collar he has on his neck, the field he his on, the mere presence of his handler. A dog that shows this strong of a response to a pinch collar....no telling what will happen with an E-collar. I am not so sure the dog even cares the pinch collar is activated by the handler...seems to me the dog is just thinking...holy shit what was that? Even good dogs have adverse reactions to an E-collar. And what does the handler do to correct those problems....more e-collar. Soon the dog learns, there simply is no escape from the E-collar, it's coming no matter what I do...and even when I get this behavior right. It's just going to come one the next. There are whole lotta things to think about when choosing to employ an E-collar, not if it will just solve the problem at hand. I do use an E-collar and have had good results, I have also ****ed a dog that was less than for the rest of his life with one. The E-collar in the hands of a person who used a pinch with the result of a dog shutting down...is a recipe for disaster. I am no E-collar guru....But I have never heard a trainer who has had success with E-collar training state a begginer need not be a pro to have success with it. In fact, I have heard them say what I just said. If your going to use it, you better be damn sure you know what your doing.




James, I'm assuming that you've never seen a real pro with an e-collar. I don't think it's the answer to every dogs issues, but I have seen it do some things I would have never, ever would have thought would be possible. It must be seen really. I have clients ask me often "how is it possible for you to use a shock collar to make my shy dog more confident?" Really the proof is in the training, talk is cheap. 

"A dog that shows this strong of a response to a pinch collar....no telling what will happen with an E-collar." Your still seeing the collar as a method of correction, not a method of motivation. 
The tool can be used both ways, but in this case, we need a motivator, not a correction device.


Like I said , being the first one to reply. The work has to be done by a real pro, if this women is not interested in seeking out quality training, with a trainer who has done work like this before, then tell her to come back when she has a dog that will want to work.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> And the Ecollar is the perfect tool to use for this with a handler sensitive dog. Teaching the recall shows the dog that merely being close to the handler _"keeps him safe"_ from discomfort. When you add this to other methods used to build a relationship with a dog, you get very fast results.
> 
> >Lou,
> 
> ...


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Ted Efthymiadis said:


> James, I'm assuming that you've never seen a real pro with an e-collar. I don't think it's the answer to every dogs issues, but I have seen it do some things I would have never, ever would have thought would be possible. It must be seen really. I have clients ask me often "how is it possible for you to use a shock collar to make my shy dog more confident?" Really the proof is in the training, talk is cheap.
> 
> "A dog that shows this strong of a response to a pinch collar....no telling what will happen with an E-collar." Your still seeing the collar as a method of correction, not a method of motivation.
> The tool can be used both ways, but in this case, we need a motivator, not a correction device.
> ...


Ted,

A professional e-collar expert like (Walleed Maalouf or Bart Bellon) could likely motivate their dog with an ecollar BUT this lady isn't either of these people and the chances of HER
building a relationship with HER dog based on HER use of an
e-collar are slim and none.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I am of the opinion this dog should spend his time playing in the back yard, and working ob for treats in the back yard..

I can't imagine bringing a dog to a club for sport training that cannot handle the obedience methods, let alone try to get him to do bitework. maybe if it was all prey and just for fun, but after reading about all the drive building needed, why bother...get him a new buddy.....a better dobie...to play with...


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Joby Becker said:


> I am of the opinion this dog should spend his time playing in the back yard, and working ob for treats in the back yard..
> 
> I can't imagine bringing a dog to a club for sport training that cannot handle the obedience methods, let alone try to get him to do bitework. maybe if it was all prey and just for fun, but after reading about all the drive building needed, why bother...get him a new buddy.....a better dobie...to play with...



Joby,

The solution isn't in the backyard. The solution is for the owner to take her dog to different places and play with him
The problem isn't the obedience methods, it is the use of
corrections before a dog understands the exercises. Teach the dog that he will get something he wants (food, play attention) when he does something you want (heel, retrieve)
and the dog will be happier and the owner less stressed.
I'm all for drive building exercises, but they must be appropriate for the dog. There may be lots of dogs that are better for the sport, but I thought it was made clear that this
particular Dobermann is the one this lady wants to work.
What are her priorities. Does she want the best dog for Schutzhund or is Schutzhund just something to try with her
dog?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

James Downey said:


> That's a risky endeavor. Look I do not mean to be rude. But the rest of us are not dumb shits with no experience or knowledge.


I've never said that you were.



James Downey said:


> I can see how flooding in theory can make a dog work...but what kind of life is that.


I said nothing of flooding.



James Downey said:


> I would keep working in the sweat shop too, if the boss hit E-collar everytime I slowed down. But I guarntee even if the dog did get it, and start to work to avoid the shock believing he is making it happen...


It seems to me that you are talking about using the Ecollar quite a bit differently than I do. I'm ONLY talking about the Ecollar AS I USE IT. Here are the words from my first post,


> I think that the Ecollar *used as I advocate, * is the ideal tool for this dog. [Emphasis added]


If you'll check out my articles there's nothing there about _"flooding,"_ or _"the boss hit[ing] the Ecollar every time [you] slowed down."_ I'll guess that is how YOU would use the Ecollar. But it's not how I use it. Your method will not teach the dog that he's in charge of the stim, nor will it build a good relationship between the dog and the handler. My methods do both.



James Downey said:


> if he ever gets wise to the colllar...your screwed.


I'll guess that you're referring to a dog becoming learning that when the collar is on, he must obey and when it's off, he does not have to. This is a training flaw, not something that's inherent to the Ecollar. It can happen with any training collar and even something as benign as a bandanna. It's easily avoided with a few simple methods. This also, is discussed in my articles.



James Downey said:


> That's if the dog does not just go hide under a tree, and blow his anal glands instead.


I'll guess that is something that's happened to you or something that you've seen. I've never had it happen, perhaps because I'm working down at the level that the dog first feels. Does the dog in  THIS LINK look like he's going to _"blow his anal glands?"_



James Downey said:


> Also, the prediction that the dog is going to associate the stim to his behavior is just that...a prediction. He could relate it to the collar he has on his neck, the field he his on, the mere presence of his handler.


James I've used Ecollars on well over 3,000 dogs. Not one of them has had any of the responses you describe. I have no doubt that the next 3,000 will be pretty much the same.



James Downey said:


> A dog that shows this strong of a response to a pinch collar....no telling what will happen with an E-collar.


Probably if, as most people do, they hit the button at a high level of stim when the dog doesn't comply with a command, you're right. Such dogs usually have no idea that the stim is connected to their noncompliance. And it's probably even going to be worse with a dog as described in the OP. My methods clearly show the dog why the stim starts and what makes it stop. The dogs learn that THEY are in charge of the stim. This is very empowering, especially for the type of dog that's under discussion.

I'm certainly not saying that if my methods are used on this dog he'll be in the running for the next national championship. I AM saying that if my methods are used on this dog that he'll stop shutting down and his sensitivity to corrections won't be an issue.

I've worked with some extremely reactive dogs, HERE'S  one such example, and none of them had any kind of adverse reaction. The stim level just isn't high enough.



James Downey said:


> I am not so sure the dog even cares the pinch collar is activated by the handler...seems to me the dog is just thinking...holy shit what was that?


Even the dumbest dog knows that a leash correction came from his handler. If the dog is handler sensitive, I think that he DOES care that the correction comes from the handler. If my methods are used the dog learns that the stim comes from his behavior. The handler is not part of the equation.

This isn't just my opinion. It's widely supported through the Ecollar training community. Steven R. Lindsay discusses this in volume three of his "Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training."


> In practice, *dogs do not appear to link ES with the handler, especially persons with whom the dog is closely attached and familiar. *In fact, the most interesting uses of the collar depend on this lack of aversive association, including lasting reward and opponent safety effects …
> 
> Most scientific evidence supports the notion that the cessation of aversive ES in the context of escape/avoidance training is more likely to *enhance social attraction, promote feelings of safety, and calm a dog rather than make a dog afraid or apprehensive.*
> 
> ...





James Downey said:


> Even good dogs have adverse reactions to an E-collar.


No argument there. I've seen it many times myself. But these _"adverse reactions to an Ecollar"_ simply don't happen with my methods. The stim levels are too low.



James Downey said:


> And what does the handler do to correct those problems....more e-collar.


Perhaps when some use the Ecollar this becomes an issue. It's not with my methods.



James Downey said:


> Soon the dog learns, there simply is no escape from the E-collar, it's coming no matter what I do...and even when I get this behavior right. It's just going to come one the next.


This is probably the case with most people who use the Ecollar. It's not an issue when stim is used at the level that the dog first feels.



James Downey said:


> There are whole lotta things to think about when choosing to employ an E-collar, not if it will just solve the problem at hand.


Boy, ain't that the truth. Fortunately I've thought of most of them and they're discussed in my articles. What I didn't cover, over the years people have written me about and they've been included.



James Downey said:


> I do use an E-collar and have had good results, I have also ****ed a dog that was less than for the rest of his life with one.


I'll guarantee that you're NOT using my methods. If all you do is use it to punish noncompliance, as I guess is the case with what you did, results with vary. if I'm wrong please correct me and describe how you used it.



James Downey said:


> The E-collar in the hands of a person who used a pinch with the result of a dog shutting down...is a recipe for disaster.


HERE'S a comment from someone who tired just about every tool known to modern dog training, INCLUDING a pinch collar, EXCEPT the Ecollar over the course of about two years. Jen Macker wrote,


> … I have tried everything with this dog --standard obedience classes, prong coloars, Halti/Gentle Leaders, clicker training, Tellington Touch and even herbal sedatives. … nothing really addressed her fear based aggression around strangers, cars or other dogs. I've been working with Lou's collar now for only a few days and the changes he has described are all true. I have been continually puzzled at how or why this method has improved her confidence in fearful or emotionally charged situations. I can't explain it, but it works...





James Downey said:


> But I have never heard a trainer who has had success with E-collar training state a begginer need not be a pro to have success with it. In fact, I have heard them say what I just said. If your going to use it, you better be damn sure you know what your doing.


If you've been reading my posts, you've heard ME say it any number of times. I'm _"a trainer who has had success with Ecollar training"_ and I'll state that a beginner _"need not be a pro to have success with it."_

People who make this comment are NOT using my methods. They were adapted and developed specifically so that people with little OR NO experience in training a dog can use an Ecollar to get results that are completely to their satisfaction. A read of the links I've supplied in this post will show you that people who have used my methods are in that boat. And if you're not satisfied with them, feel free to read some of the unsolicited testimonials that are on my site, HERE. 

For those who can't be bothered to click the link here's one. David wrote,


> The advice and techniques offered by you on your website have already been most helpful to me. Now that I have seen first-hand just how humane and easy training can be with the e-collar, I'd like to help to spread the word to the uneducated of which there seems to be NO shortage.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Joby,
> 
> The solution isn't in the backyard. The solution is for the owner to take her dog to different places and play with him
> The problem isn't the obedience methods, it is the use of
> ...


I know Thomas, I was being pragmatic...

I also work dogs in bite work that need a lot of help...people just want to have fun with their dogs, I get it...but it doesn't seem like the dog is having any fun with it, thats all I meant.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Lou,



Thomas Barriano said:


> Talk is cheap and theories are great.


My "theories" have been put to the test on over 3,000 dogs. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> I rely more on hands on experience with the breed of dogs we're talking about (Dobermanns) training in the sport we are talking about (Schutzhund)


I've had a bit of experience with Dobies myself. There's little difference between them and any other breed. While I've never competed in SchH this discussion is NOT about SchH. It's about a dog that is shutting down when when corrected by the handler. My "fix" for this will work no matter what sport the dog is involved in, or even if he's "just a pet." 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Trying to teach this dog a "safe zone" is more likely to produce a clinging velcro dog, afraid to leave your side, then to create any kind of relationship.


The aim is NOT to _"teach … a 'safe zone.' "_ That happens as a consequence of using my method. As soon as it does (the articles are quite clear on this) you teach the sit with the Ecollar, which breaks the "safe zone" superstition in a couple of repetitions. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Building a relationship, requires hands on, not electronic stimulation or mechanical manipulation.


My method of teaching the recall changes a dog very quickly. In about 25 minutes I took a very fearful dog that tried to bite me on the face and had him crawling into my lap, licking my face. 

Earlier I wrote,


> The Ecollar is the perfect tool for this problem. Due to the nature of the stim as NOT coming from the handler, the dog comes to believe that it comes from his behavior. He is responsible for what happens to him. No other tool gives this. Once a dog that is overly sensitive to handler corrections stops making an association between the handler and the correction he's much more likely to perform well.





Thomas Barriano said:


> Maybe you can get stupid dogs to think the correction is deus ex machina, but Dobermanns know who has their finger on the remote


ROFL. Right Thomas. Dobies are different from every other breed of dog on the planet. How often have we heard this with (insert breed of your choice here?!) 

Earlier I wrote,


> People who make comments of this nature, that how the tool is used makes no difference, really have no idea of the possibilities. Just because some people don't know how to use an Ecollar for this issue doesn't mean that it can't be used. It just means that THEY are incapable of it.





Thomas Barriano said:


> People * who think they can do everything with one particular tool *and don't recognize the limitations of any tool or device are *fooling themselves. * [Emphasis added]


LOL. I've NEVER said that I can do *"everything with"* an Ecollar. But it works well for THIS ISSUE. I only mention Ecollars when I think that they'll provide the desired results. NOT for every issue as you like to pretend. The people who are *"fooling themselves"* are those who make assumptions based only on what they know, ignoring the experience, training and education of others. Open minds are GOOD THINGS. Too bad some lack them. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Experienced trainers have various tools in their training boxes and will use what ever tool works with any particular dog


I agree. I use whatever tool/method is best for the dog at hand and what I'm teaching. In this case, the Ecollar, used with my methods will give good results.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> A professional e-collar expert like (Walleed Maalouf or Bart Bellon) could likely motivate their dog with an ecollar BUT this lady isn't either of these people and the chances of HER building a relationship with HER dog based on HER use of an e-collar are slim and none.


Didn't you just write this,


> *Talk *is cheap and *theories *are great. [Emphasis added]


 You've never used my methods have you Thomas? Hmm, doesn't that mean that you're *"talk[ing]"* from *a theoretical position?* Oh well … 

If you had you any experience using the Ecollar as I advocate, you'd know better. 

I have no doubt that anyone who can read and follow simple instructions could change this situation. 

Again, this dog is probably never going to be podium material. I bet that his owner knows this and isn't interested in doing anything but having some fun with her dog. I have no doubt that if my methods were used as written, that his handler sensitivity to corrections would disappear. That it would allow his training to progress.


----------



## Ted Efthymiadis (Apr 3, 2009)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Ted,
> 
> A professional e-collar expert like (Walleed Maalouf or Bart Bellon) could likely motivate their dog with an ecollar BUT this lady isn't either of these people and the chances of HER
> building a relationship with HER dog based on HER use of an
> e-collar are slim and none.



Before sending a reply, please read part of my post.

"The work has to be done by a real pro, if this women is not interested in seeking out quality training, with a trainer who has done work like this before, then tell her to come back when she has a dog that will want to work."


----------



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

Guys, appreciate all your inputs, and I thought I would chip in a bit before the thread goes into a sorry direction.

Yes, an ecollar may solve the problem with an expert ecollar trainer. It may makes things even worse. At the present moment, I don't think she has the choice of using the ecollar nor is she thinking about it. NZ is so isolated from the rest of the world that getting decent training in any areas, not just dog training is sometimes really hard.

Yes, in realism, it is probably better that she gets another dog. However, she has something to work with now, and it is better than nothing. I admire her determination to see the dog through the process whether or not he is up to it. She may hit a training hurdle, like all of us who will probably do, and she tries her best. Maybe she will make it with this dog, maybe she will not, but she will definitely gain the experience. She is probably not thinking about getting top points in Schutzhund, as most of the members in my club are. They are there because they love the sports, and they want to do something fun... besides, playing in the backyard, agility. etc... And in the future, if she does get a good working Dobermann, I bet she will then be more ready to handle problems like this... I guess the question she is asking herself is "should she just give up or try her best to learn something.." 

Again, thanks for all your inputs. I will try to see if I can take some videos in future training sessions and pose it for more advise (hopefully not causing too many internet wars! )


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

When I read this a couple of things pop out to me.

The first is the training of the clicker and pinch. Sounds like she has used the pinch in the past with no issues as you were still able to work the dog. So why did the dog shut down THIS time? Without seeing all this sounds like a lack of communication or unbalanced trainig or a combo of both. Imo sensitive dogs really need the balance, the harder or more personal the correction the bigger and more worthy the reward. I think u need to figure out the root before u can really solve the problem. 

The other thing is the fact that the dog shut down and it doesn't sound like anything was done about it. If that is the case then u just taught the dog that all it has to do is laydown to get his way. Imo dogs need to learn to work through corrections and that avoidance is not an option....now I am not saying to hammer a dog like this but yes lift it back up calmly and ask for a behavior and reward greatly when given..build the dogs confidence.....again balance the training. Now I am not a professional dog trainer like many who have posted prior, just someone who likes the problem solving aspect of training..so take my opnion for what it is worth.

T


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> Once a dog that is overly sensitive to handler corrections stops making an association between the handler and the correction he's much more likely to perform well.
> .


And then there are those dogs who are not sensitive to the handler that perform better knowing the corrections come from the handler ;-) Just saying :-\"


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Not in this thread.


----------



## Chris Michalek (Feb 13, 2008)

I've dealt with this issue before with a POS rottweiler. The handler needs to regain trust and build the bond with the dog. She needs to do nothing but play play play for several weeks. Then she needs to train in a way where there are minimal corrections. For me, that was a marker system but the dog was totally free. I don't know what kind of prey drive this Dobe has but for me the rottie was very prey driven and food motivated. I was able to get the dog back by only rewarding success. 

I would walk with a ball and say HEEL. The dog would get stupid and run circles around me but eventually settled into place and then got the reward which was throwing the ball away from me. (Normally I like to play tug and have my dogs engage me) Throwing the ball away decreases the stress of engaging the handler. It's very tedious work but I got it accomplished. 

Eventually we got back to bite work and then we would amp the dog up and do OB for bites, when the dog has his drive up then I had to ability to do physical corrections and that helped too.

I wouldn't be doing ecollars or anything else. Honestly, I would just get rid of that dog and get a new one. But if she is determined to keep her POS Dobbie then she needs to be willing to put in the time to train it right.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Ted Efthymiadis said:


> Before sending a reply, please read part of my post.
> 
> "The work has to be done by a real pro, if this women is not interested in seeking out quality training, with a trainer who has done work like this before, then tell her to come back when she has a dog that will want to work."



Ted

I did read all of your post. Do you expect this lady to contact
Bart or Waleed and have them train her to train her dog with an e-collar? I'm confused with how you expect her to
"seek out quality training"


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> Lou,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

James Downey said:


> Then I would start marking the wrong the responses with an unemotional no and make himdo it again. and when your resetting, keep it as if the dog were a five year old learning to spell....I would be silly, and talk to them like I would talk to a little child, like noooooo silly, try again...all in a playful voice.


I liked the entire post, but am only quoting a little bit of it. The one part I disagree with LOL I wouldn't use "no" with this dog, it sounds like it's so sensitive that it's going to have a negative association to the word, regardless of how it's said. I also don't think people can really say "no" in an unemotional way. IMO when we try to say it in a neutral manner it still comes out negative because of the word itself (how the sounds are formed) not to mention the dogs past experience with the word. Or if done as suggested (noooooo silly) it overly positive for a negative marker. I would change the negative marker to "wrong" "uh-oh" "try again" whatever. Probably going to be more neutral to this dog.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Earlier I wrote,


> My "theories" have been put to the test on over 3,000 dogs.





Thomas Barriano said:


> Sorry Lou but anyone can make claims of 3K or 20 K dogs. *I believe your claims are inflated.* [Emphasis added]


Thomas there's no need for you to apologize for the rudeness of calling me a liar. It's what I've come to expect from you. Interesting that you've written in the recent past (perhaps twice) that you were not going to respond to my posts any more, and yet, here you are (for the third time in JUST this thread!) Since you opened this door I think it's reasonable to ask, which one of us is the man of his word?

I've been involved in training dogs since 1979. That's over 31 years. That's about 97 dogs per year. That's less than two dogs per week. I don't think that's a lot for a dog training business, even run as a "side business." Especially in the Los Angeles area.

Almost forgot. That includes the dogs that I've worked at my seminars. There have been 43 seminars done in those 31 years. I have worked with handlers from over 150 LE agencies (both domestic and foreign) and nearly 30 SAR teams, several high level security companies; not to mention my privately–owned–pet–clients. 

Almost forgot the countless dogs that I've worked with from LE officers who just ask for help. 

There are plenty of reference available to anyone who asks for them. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The subject is a Dobermann* completing *at a Schutzhund club.


I bet you mean_"competing."_ I don't think this dog is "competing." I think the more fitting term is to say that this dog is* training* at a SchH club. The OP uses these words, _"… we are just amateur trying to have fun with our dogs …" No mention made of "competing."

The OP says, "Today, *while training, *[NOTHING about competing] the handler corrected him for a couple of mistakes and he shut down." [Emphasis added]

The fact is that there's no difference in training OB between a pet owner, an AKC competitor or a SchH wannabe. I don't think that there's a significant difference between a down in SchH or any other sport or for a pet. Ditto for the rest of the OB commands. 

We're talking about the dog shutting down *when being worked in OB. * It's highly misleading to say that this dog is "competing" when all that's happening is that he's *being trained *in OB. That's the sort of disingenuous statement that I expect from you. The issue is that the dog shut down when corrected by the handler. It makes no difference where the dog is being worked.



Thomas Barriano said:



The claim that your "fix will work no matter what sport the dog is involved in" is egotistical and NOT based on real world experience or empirical proof

Click to expand...

My methods have been tested in the real world repeatedly. When I do a seminar I don't pre–screen the dogs. Whatever issue the dog has is the issue that I work with. It doesn't get any more "real world" than that. The proof is there, you're just too lazy to get it.

One theory of debating is; if you don't have the facts (and it's obvious that you don't) attack your opponent personally (and you do it rather consistently).

Earlier I wrote,



The aim is NOT to "teach … a 'safe zone.' " That happens as a consequence of using my method …

Click to expand...




Thomas Barriano said:



I never said it was the aim, but *even you admit * it is a consequence. [Emphasis added]

Click to expand...

This isn't *an admission* Thomas. It's a statement made openly and freely. It's the exact same thing that happens when any form of compulsion is used to train the recall. It's just more pronounced with the Ecollar. ANY dog trained with corrections is looking to find a "safe spot" where he'll be free from discomfort. Sometimes it's a movement, sometimes it's a location, sometimes it's a position.



Thomas Barriano said:



Your "cure" for a Dobermann sensitive to handler correction is to teach him a recall using an Ecollar and then teach the sit with the Ecollar … ???

Click to expand...

Breed is not an issue, behavior is. Teaching the recall and the sit with an Ecollar has brought success with highly sensitive dogs many times. An explanation can be found HERE towards the end of the article.



Thomas Barriano said:



I believe establishing a relationship is more effective, cheaper than buying and learning how to use an e-collar and less likely to be abused.

Click to expand...

Let's look at these three statements. The first, "establishing a relationship is more effective." Using the Ecollar to teach the recall as I do, DOES establish a relationship with the dog. The handler's mere presence bring comfort and safety. Of course there's more than just this and I've written an article on this forum about it. It's HERE.

The second part of your statement is that it's "cheaper than buying" and there is no argument. Other tools (other than the Ecollar) are definitely cheaper.

As to the next part of that statement, the expense "of learning to use"  the tool, you're wrong. All one has to do is click on my articles and read. No charge at all. Many people have learned to use an Ecollar like this.

And the last part of your statement, the "abuse" reference is completely absurd. This owner is entirely unlikely to abuse her dog with the Ecollar.

Earlier I wrote,



In about 25 minutes I took a very fearful dog that tried to bite me on the face and had him crawling into my lap, licking my face.

Click to expand...




Thomas Barriano said:



That is your claim and is difficult to substantiate or prove

Click to expand...

"Difficulty" is relative. It's always been too much of a bother for you but then you know that once you learn the truth, you'd have to stop making this stupid statement and all the rest of your baseless insinuations would be placed into doubt as well. It would take a few emails and phone calls but as you say, it's difficult! LOL. 

I did this work in front of a well respected SAR group in your home state. It was several years ago so I don't know if any of the people who were there are still there. I know that the dog's owner remembers it well. 

The article about this is on my website HERE. Many of the comments are from the dog's owner who wrote them on an email list that anyone can access. But she's probably lying too. ROFL



Thomas Barriano said:



Like I said in my first reply. I've HOT two SchH III Dobermanns. What have you done with the breed (or any dog)

Click to expand...

Thomas you recently wrote this,



You don't need to trial a dog to be credible.

Click to expand...

And this?



You don't have to play in a sport at all.

Click to expand...

But now, your standard seems to be that since I've not titled a dog that I have no credibility. Were you lying then or are you lying now?

I was a police K-9 handler for over 5 years. I was my department's in–house K-9 trainer for about fifteen years. More about me can be found ON MY WEBSITE.

But speaking of creds, I haven't seen you advertising any seminars where you're the head instructor or even teaching at all. I've got three more seminars planned for this year and it's only February! 

How do we know that YOU trained these two "SchH III Dobermanns?" I have little doubt that you own them or that you put the titles on them; but training them is quite something else again. What was it that you said? " … difficult to substantiate or prove." 

Doesn't your club have someone who actually puts on the sleeve and works the dog? In SchH he's often called "the helper" but *he's the one who's really doing the training. You're just holding the leash! *

Doesn't your club have a *Training Director? *Wouldn't he be the one doing the training? Isn't he the one telling the helper and you what to do? Again, you're just holding the leash. Wouldn't HE be the trainer, and you the handler? 

In fact, how do we know that you haven't *paid someone else *to do the training and then you took the credit for it? You wouldn't be the first!



Thomas Barriano said:



Let's see a video of you accomplishing this *extraordinary feat. *

Click to expand...

It's really not extraordinary Thomas. Many people who have read about it on my site or on one of the forums where I've described it have done it themselves. Perhaps YOU think it's extraordinary because you are incapable of doing anything with such a dog. Perhaps it's because you've never seen it done. Perhaps you're so weak that you can't allow that someone with a contrary theory might be right and that you're simply wrong.

In any case, your consistent and predictable demand for videos is at the same time boring, stupid and monotonous. I'm retired and this work was done before everyone and his brother had a video camera, before people were posting their work on YouTube. I don't have any video, I never thought that anyone would be dim-witted enough to ask for it. I think that eye witnesses are far better and they're available for the asking.



Thomas Barriano said:



Statements about "your methods" working in *this that and every situation * are silly [Emphasis added]

Click to expand...

I love this lie that you consistently tell. NEVER have I said that my methods will work in "this that and every situation." IN THIS CASE the Ecollar will give good results.

If the dog's owner will contact me personally I'll arrange for the loan or purchase of an Ecollar (owner's choice). If the latter, and they're not happy with their results after using my method to teach the recall and the sit, I'll give them a complete refund._


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

I think that this situation, shutting down, is part of the _"fight or flight syndrome."_ There are four parts to this, not just two, as is commonly stated. The other two parts are _"freeze"_ (the "shutting down" that we see in this case) and _"fool around"_ wherein a dog will do some incompatible behavior such as urinating, purposefully looking away, or sniffing the ground to ignore the threat. Some call this avoidance behavior. In this case the threat that the dog is avoiding comes from the handler in the form of corrections. 

This shutting down behavior is self-rewarding on a couple of levels. The handler stops jerking on the dog's leash, ending the discomfort. The handler may go into "poor puppy," adopting a soft attitude and consoling the dog, but even if he does not, the dog has stopped the leash pops. 

Some Ecollar users will simply crank up the level of stim in an effort _to blast _the dog out of the immobility. I would never do this. Instead I teach the recall and then the sit by gently guiding the dog into the desired behavior at the same time that stim is applied at the level that the dog first feels.


----------



## Al Curbow (Mar 27, 2006)

To the OP, tough situation, Kadi gave sage advice.

Thomas, what exactly is it that you dislike about Lou's method? I have to say that i've had unbelievable results. I try to use as sparingly a correction as possible with my dogs (i've been called a pussy by people, lol) and Lou's method fits that bill. It's so easy and quick, the dog learns and we move forward to learn something else. Have you tried his method? I'm just curious. I found Lou to be extremely helpful.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Pointless and argumentative.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I liked the entire post, but am only quoting a little bit of it. The one part I disagree with LOL I wouldn't use "no" with this dog, it sounds like it's so sensitive that it's going to have a negative association to the word, regardless of how it's said. I also don't think people can really say "no" in an unemotional way. IMO when we try to say it in a neutral manner it still comes out negative because of the word itself (how the sounds are formed) not to mention the dogs past experience with the word. Or if done as suggested (noooooo silly) it overly positive for a negative marker. I would change the negative marker to "wrong" "uh-oh" "try again" whatever. Probably going to be more neutral to this dog.


Kadi,

I agree there is a good chance of this particular dog making
a negative association with the use of the word No. A clicker might be a better choice?
I've come up with my own protocol for this situation
I'm going to attach my clicker to one of those heavy trucker
wallet chains. When the dog doesn't obey an obedience command I'm going to say tsk tsk and then click for attention or compliance. IF the dog still doesn't obey then I'm going to use the clicker as a throw chain and see if that
doesn't work


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Al Curbow said:


> To the OP, tough situation, Kadi gave sage advice.
> 
> Thomas, what exactly is it that you dislike about Lou's method? I have to say that i've had unbelievable results. I try to use as sparingly a correction as possible with my dogs (i've been called a pussy by people, lol) and Lou's method fits that bill. It's so easy and quick, the dog learns and we move forward to learn something else. Have you tried his method? I'm just curious. I found Lou to be extremely helpful.


Al,

I like e-collars and use them often. However I don't see an ecollar in the hands of a novice trainer as being time effective or cost effective in this situation. ie a dog shutting down from correction.
I've gone to quite a few e-collar seminars and have a large collection of instructional videos. I don't find Lou's "method" as being either unique or original. Similar techniques have been used by several better known trainers. Regurgitating and repackaging other peoples work doesn't make one a trainer.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Re: Shut down to correction
Earlier I wrote,
Quote:
My "theories" have been put to the test on over 3,000 dogs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Barriano View Post
Sorry Lou but anyone can make claims of 3K or 20 K dogs. I believe your claims are inflated. [Emphasis added]

Thomas there's no need for you to apologize for the rudeness of calling me a liar.

>What I said was "I believe your claims are inflated" an opinion but don't
>let the truth prevent you from trying to play the victim LOL

It's what I've come to expect from you. Interesting that you've written in the recent past (perhaps twice) that you were not going to respond to my posts any more, and yet, here you are (for the third time in JUST this thread!) Since you opened this door I think it's reasonable to ask, which one of us is the man of his word?

>I replied to the original poster first. You're not all that important, dispite
>what YOU might think

I've been involved in training dogs since 1979. That's over 31 years. That's about 97 dogs per year. That's less than two dogs per week. I don't think that's a lot for a dog training business, even run as a "side business." Especially in the Los Angeles area.

>Previously you've claimed to be "in charge" of the Culver City PD K9
>unit for a far shorter period. You've been on disability for extended
>periods of time and assigned to other duties by your very own >admission on several occassions

Almost forgot. That includes the dogs that I've worked at my seminars. There have been 43 seminars done in those 31 years. I have worked with handlers from over 150 LE agencies (both domestic and foreign) and nearly 30 SAR teams, several high level security companies; not to mention my privately–owned–pet–clients.

>More puffery and exaggeration. Prevously you claimed to have only
>started doing seminars since your retirement and then an average of
>three/year?

Almost forgot the countless dogs that I've worked with from LE officers who just ask for help.

>I forgot, you were the go to guy for the state of California LOL


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Barriano View Post
The subject is a Dobermann completing at a Schutzhund club.
I bet you mean"competing." I don't think this dog is "competing." I think the more fitting term is to say that this dog is training at a SchH club. The OP uses these words, _"… we are just amateur trying to have fun with our dogs …" No mention made of "competing."

The OP says, "Today, while training, [NOTHING about competing] the handler corrected him for a couple of mistakes and he shut down." [Emphasis added]

The fact is that there's no difference in training OB between a pet owner, an AKC competitor or a SchH wannabe. I don't think that there's a significant difference between a down in SchH or any other sport or for a pet. Ditto for the rest of the OB commands.

>The FACT that you've never competed in AKC Obedience or Schutzhund
>makes that your opinion. An opinion without practical experience needs
>to be taken with a grain of salt

We're talking about the dog shutting down when being worked in OB. It's highly misleading to say that this dog is "competing" when all that's happening is that he's being trained in OB. That's the sort of disingenuous statement that I expect from you. The issue is that the dog shut down when corrected by the handler. It makes no difference where the dog is being worked.

>Gee, you do seem to go on and on and get a lot of mileage out of a
>simple miss statement? I believe most everyone else understood my
>point.


>Your repeatedly stating that "your" methods work is NOT proof that they
>do

One theory of debating is; if you don't have the facts (and it's obvious that you don't) attack your opponent personally (and you do it rather consistently).

>another theory of debating (as opposed to Dog Training) is to make 
>inaccurate statements and hope no one notices. You're pretty good
>at that

Earlier I wrote,
Quote:
The aim is NOT to "teach … a 'safe zone.' " That happens as a consequence of using my method …
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Barriano View Post
I never said it was the aim, but even you admit it is a consequence. [Emphasis added]
This isn't an admission Thomas. It's a statement made openly and freely. 

>Statement or admission semantics

It's the exact same thing that happens when any form of compulsion is used to train the recall. It's just more pronounced with the Ecollar. ANY dog trained with corrections is looking to find a "safe spot" where he'll be free from discomfort. Sometimes it's a movement, sometimes it's a location, sometimes it's a position.

>You're assuming that the recall was being trained. That was NOT stated
>The problem (as stated in the original post) was the dog shutting down
>nothing to do with seeking a safe zone. The shutting down is due to
>the dog NOT understanding the exercise or what he was being
>corrected for

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Barriano View Post
Your "cure" for a Dobermann sensitive to handler correction is to teach him a recall using an Ecollar and then teach the sit with the Ecollar … ???
Breed is not an issue, behavior is. 

>If you really believe that breed isn't an issue when it comes to how
>you train a dog. You're NOT really working in the real world

Teaching the recall and the sit with an Ecollar has brought success with highly sensitive dogs many times. An explanation can be found HERE 
towards the end of the article.

>Irrelevant 
>the original post had NOTHING to do with teaching the recall or sit.
>You're making a problem with a simple solution (build trust and a
>relationship with her dog) more complicated with the addition of
>an e-collar and additional exercises




Thomas you recently wrote this,
Quote:
You don't need to trial a dog to be credible.
And this?
Quote:
You don't have to play in a sport at all.


>Nice tactic. Both those statements were made in another topic and
>referred to PPD trainers and PPD training. Try to avoid taking
>statements out of context

I was a police K-9 handler for over 5 years. I was my department's in–house K-9 trainer for about fifteen years. More about me can be found ON MY WEBSITE.

>The Culver City PD K9 unit averaged 2-3? dogs while you were there.
>They didn't have an official "in house trainer" and you were on
>disability or working as a stock clerk for how long? More puffery and
>exaggeration. Of course YOU'VE got all sorts of "information" about
>YOU on YOUR website LMAO. There's also a lot of information on
>Steve Leighs website about you. VBG




How do we know that YOU trained these two "SchH III Dobermanns?"

>The United Schutzhund Club
>of America lists me as being a member of the SchH III club. The
>requirements are to Handle Own and title a dog from BH to SchH III

Doesn't your club have someone who actually puts on the sleeve and works the dog? In SchH he's often called "the helper" but he's the one who's really doing the training. You're just holding the leash!

>I've trained with more then one club and several groups and
>individuals. Schutzhund titles require passing THREE phases on the 
>same day. Decoys/Helpers are only involved in the protection phase
>and in some clubs they listen to what the owner/handler says

Doesn't your club have a Training Director? Wouldn't he be the one doing the training? Isn't he the one telling the helper and you what to do? Again, you're just holding the leash. Wouldn't HE be the trainer, and you the handler?

>I'm listed as a DVG Training Director Candidate and have been the
>TD for Three clubs. I'm the handler owner and TRAINER for all my
>dogs and have been for years. Opps Lou, do NOT pass GO do NOT
>collect $200 LOL

In fact, how do we know that you haven't paid someone else to do the training and then you took the credit for it? You wouldn't be the first!

>NOW you're getting pathetic and plain silly

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Barriano View Post
Let's see a video of you accomplishing this extraordinary feat.
It's really not extraordinary Thomas. Many people who have read about it on my site or on one of the forums where I've described it have done it themselves. Perhaps YOU think it's extraordinary because you are incapable of doing anything with such a dog.

>I guess you don't recognize sarcasm when you read it? LOL

Perhaps it's because you've never seen it done. Perhaps you're so weak that you can't allow that someone with a contrary theory might be right and that you're simply wrong.

>NOPE, I've seen lots of people train a recall and even a sit. Even seen
>a few people use an e-collar

In any case, your consistent and predictable demand for videos is at the same time boring, stupid and monotonous. I'm retired and this work was done before everyone and his brother had a video camera, before people were posting their work on YouTube. I don't have any video, I never thought that anyone would be dim-witted enough to ask for it. I think that eye witnesses are far better and they're available for the asking.

>Gosh Lou, everybody and his brother has a video camera and you're
>doing THREE seminars this year already (and it's only February) and
>no one can take a video? ROTFLMAO

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Barriano View Post
Statements about "your methods" working in this that and every situation are silly [Emphasis added]
I love this lie that you consistently tell. NEVER have I said that my methods will work in "this that and every situation." IN THIS CASE the Ecollar will give good results.

>I got it now. Your methods don't work in every situation (just in every
>situation that has come up on this list?) but you're 100% sure they'll
>work in this case with a dog and owner you've never actually seen in
>person or on video? LOL

>Heck Lou I'll even be willing to observe your up coming seminar in 
>Colorado and shoot some video for you?_


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Re: Shut down to correction
> 
> 
> >Heck Lou I'll even be willing to observe your up coming seminar in
> >Colorado and shoot some video for you?


Thats a nice offer Thomas. I know I'd like to see something like that.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

If anyone has any suggestions for the OP, please state. Thomas and Lou, take your argument to your own thread or the PM's. Either one is ok, just no more in this thread, unless it's directed to the OP, and the question she asked. Thank you.

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Al,
> 
> I like e-collars and use them often. However I don't see an ecollar in the hands of a novice trainer as being time effective or cost effective in this situation. ie a dog shutting down from correction.


Used as you probably do, I'd agree. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> I've gone to quite a few e-collar seminars and have a large collection of instructional videos. I don't find Lou's "method" as being either unique or original.


Thomas please show us a post where I said that how I teach the recall the sit or most everything else is _"unique or original."_ It's not, like EVERYONE else I copy from lots of trainers, modify their methods so it suits the result I want and then put it to use. I did develop _"the crittering protocol"_ and that is original. 

But Thaoms the fact is that there is nothing new in dog training under the sun. The rules of learning have not changed since animal arrived on the planet. So your criticism that my method is not _"unique or original"_ is just so much nonsense. 

The ONLY thing that's new is marketing. Take something from someone else, give it a catchy name and pretend that you invented it. the only difference is that I don't pretend that I invented anything, except for the crittering method that I DID invent. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Similar techniques have been used by several better known trainers.


Yep quite true. My methods are a combination of how the Ecollar was used by Jim Dobbs, Bart Bellon, Donn Yarnall, Wendell Nope, and a few others, influenced by my own work. 

Pray tell us since you seem to disagree, exactly *what is new? * and what's wrong with using something that someone else developed. EVERY TRAINER DOES IT. But when I bring it up, you have another of your now–infamous fits and launch another round of personal attacks on me. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Regurgitating and repackaging other peoples work doesn't make one a trainer.


Correct. Training lots of dogs, giving lots of seminars, speaking in front of many people, communicating knowledge and getting results makes one a trainer. I've done all of that. 

Could you provide us with your seminar schedule so that we can all sign up please?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> What I said was "I believe your claims are inflated" an opinion but don't let the truth prevent you from trying to play the victim LOL


You're just not man enough to use the word.



Thomas Barriano said:


> I replied to the original poster first. You're not all that important


You said that you weren't going to respond to my posts and then you did. Your lie is obvious. 

Earlier I wrote


> I've been involved in training dogs since 1979. That's over 31 years. That's less than two dogs per week. I don't think that's a lot for a dog training business, even run as a "side business. " Especially in the Los Angeles area.





Thomas Barriano said:


> Previously you've claimed to be "in charge" of the Culver City PD K9 unit for a far shorter period.


There's nothing in that statement about my work at the CCPD. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> You've been on disability for extended periods of time and assigned to other duties by your very own admission on several occasions


I was a K-9 handler from 1979 until 1985. When my dog retired I became the in–house trainer for the Department until 1996 when I was injured. Most departments in this area of this size hire their vendor as their trainer. We did not do this UNTIL AFTER I was injured. I ran training almost from the start, except for a very few, very brief periods. Your statements to the contrary are lies. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> More puffery and exaggeration. Prevously you claimed to have only started doing seminars since your retirement


Thomas you're a liar. My first seminar was done in 1996. I retired in 2006 but it was backdated to 2004. I did over 30 seminars before I retired. Show us those posts.



Thomas Barriano said:


> The FACT that you've never competed in AKC Obedience or Schutzhund makes that your opinion. An opinion without practical experience needs to be taken with a grain of salt


Please tell us of the difference between a response to a "sit command" in AKC OB and SchH or any other sport and for a pet that's not competing. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Your repeatedly stating that "your" methods work is NOT proof that they do


Certainly not. Not any more than your claim to have trained two dogs to SchH III. but as always, I'm happy to supply references. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> another theory of debating (as opposed to Dog Training)


Thomas, in case you hadn't noticed this is the Internet. All we can do here is TALK about training. This seems obvious but AGAIN you've missed it. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> is to make inaccurate statements and hope no one notices. You're pretty good at that


Thomas, you're a liar. Show us an inaccurate statement that I've made and while you're there PROVE that was my motive. You're just making more of your famous brainless assumptions. It's called projection!



Thomas Barriano said:


> You're assuming that the recall was being trained. That was NOT stated


I've made no such assumption. It's clear that you're not able to follow this conversation. I said that my method for fixing this dog's issue was to train the recall and the sit. You criticized this and mentioned the "safe zone" superstition. I replied that it's broken by teaching the sit as soon as it appear and that doing so makes the superstition disappear. 

This exchange had NOTHING to do with how this dog came to shut down. In fact, you thought the dog was _"competing"_ at the time it occurred and I corrected your misconception. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The shutting down is due to the dog NOT understanding the exercise or what he was being corrected for


A guess at best. Perhaps the dog understood the exercise perfectly and the correction was just too hard for her. There are more possibilities but you've got your hands full in making assumptions already.

Earlier I wrote


> Breed is not an issue, behavior is.





Thomas Barriano said:


> If you really believe that breed isn't an issue when it comes to how you train a dog. You're NOT really working in the real world


Here's another one of those idiotic statements, _ "My breed is different/better/harder to train/easier to train/more sensitive/less sensitive/(fill in the trait of your choice HERE)"_that we occasionally hear from people who don't have a clue. The dog's breed is immaterial. The individual dog's qualities are. REAL trainers know this. People who only hold onto a leash, like you, don't.

While there are minor differences in training various breeds they ALL respond to the basic laws of learning. Punish what you don't want repeated, reward what you do want repeated. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> the original post had NOTHING to do with teaching the recall or sit. You're making a problem with a simple solution (build trust and a relationship with her dog) more complicated with the addition of an e-collar and additional exercises


You attribute this problem to a poor bond. I think it's a lack of confidence combined with over–sensitivity. But even if you were right, teaching the recall and the sit as I do it, would build this bond in a manner free from noticeable handler corrections. Other methods to do this might take weeks. The Ecollar does it in minutes.

Earlier I wrote


> Thomas you recently wrote this,
> 
> 
> > You don't need to trial a dog to be credible.
> ...





Thomas Barriano said:


> Nice tactic. Both those statements were made in another topic and referred to PPD trainers and PPD training. Try to avoid taking statements out of context


Feel free to supply the context. Your meaning, as I quoted, was and still is, clear. One doesn't need to trial UNLESS you're talking about me.



Thomas Barriano said:


> They didn't have an official "in house trainer"


Smaller departments don't have full time trainers. They hire someone, usually their vendor, to do their maintenance training. We did not do this, until AFTER I was injured in 1996. While I worked many other assignments on training nights I'd go out an run the training.



Thomas Barriano said:


> and you were on disability or working as a stock clerk for how long?


I was off work completely for a while after some surgeries for injuries I received on duty. I love how you try to characterize me as a "stock clerk." After I went back to work after my first injury I was assigned to the Personnel and Training Section. Those duties included working as the Department Rangemaster. Part of those duties included ordering and receiving ammunition, targets, and other equipment used on the range. But nice try again!



Thomas Barriano said:


> There's also a lot of information on Steve Leighs website about you. VBG


Anyone who uses Mr. Leigh as a source of information about me is an idiot.

Earlier I wrote


> How do we know that YOU trained these two "SchH III Dobermanns?"





Thomas Barriano said:


> The United Schutzhund Club
> of America lists me as being a member of the SchH III club.


Thomas I've demonstrated that you're a liar. I have no doubt that you'd lie to these people as well. Joining a club does not make you a trainer.



Thomas Barriano said:


> I'm listed as a DVG Training Director Candidate and have been the TD for Three clubs.


But NOT the trainer for your own dogs. Thanks for clarifying!



Thomas Barriano said:


> I'm the handler owner and TRAINER for all my dogs…


It's clear that you are not. 

Earlier I wrote


> In fact, how do we know that you haven't paid someone else to do the training and then you took the credit for it? You wouldn't be the first!





Thomas Barriano said:


> NOW you're getting pathetic and plain silly


A weak evasion of a simple question. Looks like I struck pretty close to home.



Thomas Barriano said:


> NOPE, I've seen lots of people train a recall and even a sit. Even seen a few people use an e-collar


I'm sure that you have. I'm just as sure that you've NEVER seen anyone use the Ecollar as I do. And so your experience in this means nothing to this discussion. Earlier you wrote, _"Talk is cheap …"_Since you've never seen my work your "talk" about it "is cheap."



Thomas Barriano said:


> Gosh Lou, everybody and his brother has a video camera and you're doing THREE seminars this year already (and it's only February) and no one can take a video?


You wrote, _"Let's see a video of you accomplishing this extraordinary feat. "_Such dogs (like the one in this discussion, the kind of dog that you were referring to in your request) are relatively rare. I've only seen one at a seminar. All of the others have been with private clients. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> I got it now. Your methods don't work in every situation (just in every situation that has come up on this list?)


Thomas again, you're a liar. I've not recommended an Ecollar for _"every situation that has come up on this list."_



Thomas Barriano said:


> but you're 100% sure they'll work in this case with a dog and owner you've never actually seen in person or on video?


Sure enough that I've given a money back guarantee to the owner of the dog. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Heck Lou I'll even be willing to observe your up coming seminar in Colorado and shoot some video for you?


Thomas you're specifically *UN*invited from my seminars due to exchanges like this one. I can't abide a liar and you've shown those true colors repeatedly.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

David Frost said:


> If anyone has any suggestions for the OP, please state. Thomas and Lou, take your argument to your own thread or the PM's.


Oops Sorry David. I didn't see this post until I'd already sent in my previous ones. I'm done.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

I've said a couple of times that the Ecollar, used to teach the recall, builds a bond with the dog. Some have been skeptical. HERE'S. a dog being trained with a combination of food used in luring and the Ecollar. This trainer is Robin MacFarlane who uses Ecollar methods similar to mine. 

The dog is shown *on her first day of training. * Robin teaches _following _which gives similar results to my method of teaching the recall. I teach the dog to come towards the handler and stay with him. Robin starts by teaching the latter part. 

At about 0:55 on the video Robin says _"Following is the foundation for teaching her that she can trust people."_ At about 1:15 she says, _"And here I'm able to get my hands on her. This was after about *30 minutes of work *… and started to have a little bit of trust."_

The dog shown in this video has not shut down but is exhibiting aggression, more than likely based on fear. Of course this is not the same issue as the dog in this thread has but I wanted to address the _"Ecollar for building a bond"_ issue because some said that the issue of shutting down had to do with the dog's bond with the handler and some had doubted that the Ecollar would give a bond. 

Of course this is a pet and not a working dog but on this matter there's little difference.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Argumentative and not needed


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

I'm not done with the discussion as long as I think I have something that will help the OP.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> I've said a couple of times that the Ecollar, used to teach the recall, builds a bond with the dog. Some have been skeptical. HERE'S. a dog being trained with a combination of food used in luring and the Ecollar. This trainer is Robin MacFarlane who uses Ecollar methods similar to mine.
> 
> The dog is shown *on her first day of training. *Robin teaches _following _which gives similar results to my method of teaching the recall. I teach the dog to come towards the handler and stay with him. Robin starts by teaching the latter part.
> 
> ...


As I read so much of this, it makes it sound to me like the ecollar is completely unnecessary. Its just there for the sake of using it. Why isnt it just the food and luring that are getting the desired results? What part exactly is the collar playing in it?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> As I read so much of this, it makes it sound to me like the ecollar is completely unnecessary. Its just there for the sake of using it. Why isnt it just the food and luring that are getting the desired results? What part exactly is the collar playing in it?


I don't think that you get a bond with a dog by just shoving treats at it. 

The Ecollar recall training done with my methods do shows the dog that being away from the handler brings discomfort and that coming towards the handler and staying with the handler brings comfort. As Robin does in the video the dog is shown that not following the handler brings discomfort and doing so brings comfort. 

I know that it's anthropomorphizing but either way in the dog's mind the handler's mere presence provides a relief from the discomfort. The handler becomes a source of comfort and protection. That is a start of forming a bond with the handler as a fair and just leader. Those who merely use the Ecollar to correct misbehavior or non compliance never get this. 

Just pushing treats does not do that. And many fearful dogs will not take a treat from someone they fear. The shutdown dog in this thread is probably not interested in a treat at all when shutdown. Yet the Ecollar will provide the discomfort – comfort cycle that is part of this even while the dog is shutdown.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> I don't think that you get a bond with a dog by just shoving treats at it.
> 
> The Ecollar recall training done with my methods do shows the dog that being away from the handler brings discomfort and that coming towards the handler and staying with the handler brings comfort. As Robin does in the video the dog is shown that not following the handler brings discomfort and doing so brings comfort.
> 
> ...


I don't mean just shoving food at it. Maybe I'm looking at it wrong, but I would think the bond and confidence come from things being clear to the dog. Removing the confusion. I guess I'm thinking thats what you get with the luring-guiding-treating, that part of it. Not so much the discomfort-comfort part.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve I agree that at least part of the bond and confidence comes from, as you say, _"things being clear to the dog."_ But I don't think that _"the luring-guiding-treating"_ is really that clear, especially if the dog isn't interested in the treat. 

I think clarity comes from making things as obvious as possible to the dog; blacks and whites. Using the Ecollar to teach the dog that _away from the handler _is uncomfortable and _coming to him and staying with him _are comfortable is about as clear as it can get. And since, when done this way, the dog thinks that _his behavior _brought the discomfort, it's not something the handler does (in the dog's mind) it's something that _just is. _ It seems to come from the environment. Luring and treating is something that the dog can see that handler actively does, not something that "just is." 

I usually don't use the treat – luring method because, in my experience, few shut down dogs (as in this discussion) or highly fearful dogs are interested in a treat. If they are it can be useful but if not … I don't know if you've followed my links to Roma's or Simon's Success Stories or not but if you had offered either of them a treat, you'd have been bitten. 

If you use treats for this it will probably have to be done away from the training that's going on when shut–down occurs. If it happens during training, you're pretty much done. That dog probably is too stressed to be interested in a treat. 

I've done the _"luring–guiding–treating"_ thing in the past. It usually takes a few weeks if it's to have much lasting effect. For me, and everyone who's tried it, using the Ecollar like this is much faster.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> I don't think that you get a bond with a dog by just shoving treats at it.



Well, "shoving treats at it" may not be my description of marker training .... :lol: As someone who works with a shelter's "challenging" dogs (fearful dogs being a biggy) I agree with Steve about the confidence-building clarity that marker training can provide.


But I go into avoidance if I perceive that I am in danger of being typed to death, so that's the extent of my comments here.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

It just seems like using the ecollar to create that comfort is in itself stressful. Its like your going to have to do more to build the confidence and make the dog happy to be with you after you've defined the discomfort and the comfort to him anyway, so I'm not seeing how it isnt better to do it without the collar. Anne's statement on sometimes showing them they have to do it, I get.


----------



## Linda xanda (Feb 15, 2010)

Well, I am not a pro trainer. But, if the dog has been doing all positive training to build drive then why is he getting a correction? what merited it?
I would if it were my dog to keep improving and working the dog if I felt it could work.
I mean if the dog is soft on corrections why not a simple no to him
Then when he is doing right a yes is incorporated?
I don' t know that is just a suggestion. More talking to him and less correction.
Maybe the dog can bounce back on just verbal no's til the dog understands that he is doing good.

I also incorporated a command into ending a routine / exercise.
Then I also end up rewarding one dog with a physical pat on her chest which triggers something cause she is loving it and her drive has increased.

Maybe trying just the most simple things is enough to tweak the dog into gaining confidence. Not sure just throwing out some ideas.

Maybe the dog just doesn't have it. Maybe he would be much happier in doing agility or such. I have had this happen as well in the past. good luck to your friend.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Not needed, contributed nothing to the thread.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Well, "shoving treats at it" may not be my description of marker training ....


Has "marker training" been suggested? I don't think it has, at least not recently. Kadi did several days ago but that's not what's mentioned in either the video I showed or since; unless I missed it. 



Connie Sutherland said:


> As someone who works with a shelter's "challenging" dogs (fearful dogs being a biggy) I agree with Steve about the confidence-building clarity that marker training can provide.


If you have lots of time it can be useful. I used to suggest it with fearful dogs until I started using the Ecollar. For me and everyone else I've had try it, the results are faster and better. In ROMA'S CASE, it had been tried and failed. In SIMON'S CASE there wasn't time. This isn't my opinion. It's the opinion of Larry Tillack who used my protocol to save this dog's life. 

Larry wrote to an email list


> Well, the list has been quiet for the last few days, so I thought I'd post some information on a success that I had this past week. We got a dog returned to our assistance dog training center that was demonstrating serious aggression issues. He was attempting to bite men and women, was even successful on one woman. Thankfully the woman was one of our supporters and the bite didn't break the skin, but only because she was wearing a heavy patrol coat (she's a police officer). She did have bruises however.
> 
> … after the evaluation, decided the only viable option was to euthanize him because we just don't have the time that it takes to rehabilitate a dog with aggression this severe. I've done rehab work in the past with dogs (not this bad) and it was always a long process (average of a year). The appointment was set for the dog (Simon) to be put down on Friday April 12th.
> 
> ...


Simon was later adopted out and in the intervening years there were no repeats of his aggression.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> It just seems like using the ecollar to create that comfort is in itself stressful.


ANY method of training _"is stressful."_ With my method of using the Ecollar observable stress may last for a few minutes until the dog figures out that he can shut off the stim by coming toward and staying with me. There's at least one scientific study that showed that when dogs know what causes the stim that they do "not show considerable or persistent stress indicators." 

I'll refer you back to this comment from Steven Lindsay,


> … cessation of aversive ES in the context of escape/avoidance training is *more likely to enhance social attraction, promote feelings of safety, and calm a dog rather than make a dog afraid or apprehensive.*
> 
> … competent electronic training *may actually promote social attachment, reward, and safety … dogs experience immediate emotional relief that subsequently merges into a state of progressive relaxation incompatible with social aversion and fear …" *[Emphasis added]


Does the dog being worked in Robin's video show that his stress level is a problem? 



Steve Strom said:


> Its like your going to have to do more to build the confidence and make the dog happy to be with you after you've defined the discomfort and the comfort to him anyway, so I'm not seeing how it isnt better to do it without the collar.


Have you read Simon's Story? I suggest that before you start talking about how much stress there is with the Ecollar, you do so. Used as most people do there's not very much communication with the dog. But it's not the case when my methods are used.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

I'm not trying to say stress is so bad, but for a dog thats shut down, it just seems counter productive. The dog in the video was fearful, but didnt shut down. Also she states that the collar is only 1 component along with food,touch,etc... I can't help but think the results can be achieved just fine with the other components alone, but not with the ecollar alone.

I don't know who Steve Lindsay is, so him saying it may actually promote something reads to me that it also may actually not. I'm not saying any of this as contentiously as you may be taking it.I'm just naturally skeptical of some of this and would like to see it for myself.


----------



## Sue Miller (Jul 21, 2009)

I'll use Quinn as an example instead of saying "every dog".

I need to communicate with Quinn. 
I use markers. 
Quinn needs to understand exactly what I want him to do or else he can't do it.
Confusion is the enemy of learning.
Quinn learns when something either good or bad happens to him.
Quinn works for rewards & avoidance of correction. Both reward & avoidance bring Quinn's drive up.
Quinn looks to me to gain reward & guide him to avoid correction. Our bond is strengthened because he views me as a source of comfort & safety.
We work together as a team--I am the respected leader because I respect Quinn & I am clear, fair, calm, consistent & I love Quinn.
Quinn earns every reward--when you pair reward (treat, play, free time) with praise, praise eventually becomes the reward.
Training is structured play.
I start using the e-collar around 6-months-old--it is the most effective, but the most dangerous tool imo.
I use the e-collar sparingly. I use it to teach Quinn a lesson. If I have to constantly use the e-collar, then I am using it improperly.
An example how to use the e-collar as negatively reinforce the recall--Quinn knows exactly what the recall means: 
first escape training: I stimulate Quinn with continuous low-level stimulation (level 10 on Dogtra collar that goes up to 127). I recall Quinn & at the same time stimulate him (he's on leash & if he is confused I'll pull the leash towards me--the stimulation is not painful but Quinn doesn't like it). Immediately as soon as he turns towards me, stop the stimulation & praise him. The conditioned praise immediately relieves any stress or confusion that Quinn experiences when stimulated. I will do the escape phase a few times.
second is the avoidance: I'll wait until Quinn is preoccupied & recall him. If he comes immediately, I'll praise him. If he doesn't come immeidately, I'll use the same low-level stimulation. As soon as he comes, I'll stop stimulation & praise. 
Both these phases are used only after Quinn is rock solid & he understands completely what a command means. 

Using the e-collar as punishment to stop a behavior at a higher level stimulation (only nick at higher levels). Example is jumping up on kids:
Quinn is conditioned to understand what "no" means. When he goes out to play with children & jumps up on them, I use a level 25-35 nick on a Dogtra collar (127 levels). When he jumps on the kids, I'll say NO & nick him. Quinn soon learns that jumping & nipping children is very unpleasant. I train Quinn how to play without jumping & nipping so he can enjoy the children.

Training is always fun & never frustrating. If your dog doesn't understand what he's being corrected or rewarded for no learning occurs. You damage your relationship & you have a stressed dog. Dogs either bite you, shut down or ignore unfair corrections when they don't understand what you want or you constantly deprive them of what they want. You need to provide your dog with a friendly, happy atmosphere during training. Your dog needs a certain amount of attention every day.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> I can't help but think the results can be achieved just fine with the other components alone, but not with the ecollar alone.


Sorry but I don't understand this thinking. Had you tried this method and had it fail, I'd completely allow that you might have a point. But you are guessing based on what you know of Ecollars, knowing little if anything about my method. OTOH I've used this method to rehabilitate quite a few dogs. I also sent a link showing that someone who had never before used an Ecollar (except for blasting a dog for chasing game) had done it by following some directions I gave him on the phone. 



Steve Strom said:


> I don't know who Steve Lindsay is, so him saying it may actually promote something reads to me that it also may actually not.


Lindsay is a well known behaviorist who wrote a three volume set of books named _" Handbook of Applied Dog Behavior and Training."_ The subtitle for Volume I is _" Adaptation and Learning."_ For Volume II the subtitle is _" Etiology and Assessment of Behavior Problems."_ and Volume III is subtitled, _" Procedures and Protocols."_ The three books sell for about $230 on Amazon. 

Here are some reviews from Amazon


> The most valuable publication about dogs since Scott and Fuller's classic text, Genetics and the Social Behavior of the Dog, published in 1965. – Victoria Lea Voith, President, American Vetirinary Society of Animal Behavior
> 
> 
> The objective of giving a scientific account of all aspects of learning in dogs has been accomplished to a very high degree. ... No other comparable scientific texts are available. – Andrew Luescher, Director, Animal Behavior Clinic, School of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University


HERE'S the link to the first volume on Amazon.com. Take a look at the reviews by purchasers. 

He's a behavioral consultant to the American Dog Trainers Network. He's not well known because he does not write for the popular press. 



Steve Strom said:


> I'm not saying any of this as contentiously as you may be taking it.I'm just naturally skeptical of some of this and would like to see it for myself.


Seeing as how this complete shutdown reaction is relatively rare and not many people use my method it's doubtful that you ever will. 

If I was the only one saying this AND I was trying to sell something to make a profit, I'd understand your doubts. But I'm giving this away for free and there are several people who have tried it and had complete success! 

Earlier I asked if you had read _"Simon's Story."_ You didn't answer so it's reasonable to assume that you have not. I'm showing you supporting evidence for what I'm saying, the experience of someone who actually used my method and saved the life of a dog, yet you continue to operate from your theory without any basis for it. I just don't get this mentality. 

If you and others want to spend weeks trying to get what the Ecollar can give you in a couple of days, that's perfectly fine with me. I'm happy if there are one or two who try it and discover how well it works.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

A single sentence unobtrusive within a post describing training. Yet one, in my opinion, as important as any knowledge a trainer could ever have; "Confusion is the enemy of learning". 

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Sue Miller said:


> I need to communicate with Quinn.
> I use markers.
> Quinn learns when something either good or bad happens to him.


What is the bad that happens with markers? Are you talking about withholding a treat? 



Sue Miller said:


> Quinn works for rewards & avoidance of correction.


How are you using the term _"correction"_ here? 



Sue Miller said:


> Both reward & avoidance bring Quinn's drive up.
> 
> How does avoidance _"bring Quinn's drive up?"_
> 
> ...


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

David Frost said:


> A single sentence unobtrusive within a post describing training. Yet one, in my opinion, as important as any knowledge a trainer could ever have; "Confusion is the enemy of learning".


Could not agree more David. That's why I dislike it when people who train dogs with other methods slap on an Ecollar and start correcting them for noncompliance or for some undesired behavior without laying a foundation for the use of the tool. 

The dogs have no idea what it means. Confusion is the frequent response. Using an Ecollar like this is, I think, the reason that they have such a poor reputation.


----------



## Sue Miller (Jul 21, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> What is the bad that happens with markers? Are you talking about withholding a treat?
> In my original post, I am making a number of statements explaining how I train. I use markers to communicate to Quinn what's right & wrong. In the beginning, no means withholding reward--doesn't need to be a treat--it can be ignoring him, not playing with him, isolating him for a time...
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> Sorry but I don't understand this thinking. Had you tried this method and had it fail, I'd completely allow that you might have a point. But you are guessing based on what you know of Ecollars, knowing little if anything about my method. OTOH I've used this method to rehabilitate quite a few dogs. I also sent a link showing that someone who had never before used an Ecollar (except for blasting a dog for chasing game) had done it by following some directions I gave him on the phone.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You'd completely allow that I may have a point huh, Lol. You're right I didnt read about Simon, I just accepted it was someone who'd followed your instructions and it was successful. I've always thought you didnt correct a dog in times of fear or confusion, it would only make it worse. I guess that comes accross as a direct challenge to your use of the ecollar. It's not.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Sue Miller said:


> In my original post, I am making a number of statements explaining how I train. I use markers to communicate to Quinn what's right & wrong. In the beginning, no means withholding reward--doesn't need to be a treat--it can be ignoring him, not playing with him, isolating him for a time...


OK thanks. That was my guess but I wanted to be sure. I think all of these things bring just as much stress, if not more, than using an Ecollar as I do. Many people who use these techniques, withholding treats, toys, play or themselves or isolating, like to think that they don't cause stress but they do. It just happens passively and so they think that it's better. I disagree and know that once a dog understands what causes the stim, and my methods are based around showing him this, that there's little stress involved. 

Earlier I wrote,


> How does avoidance "bring Quinn's drive up?"





Sue Miller said:


> Quinn *feels exhilerated * when he escapes or avoids a correction. [Emphasis added]


I'm sure that he does but you said that it brought his _"drive up."_ A _"feel[ing of] exhilaration"_ is not the same as an increase in a dog's drive. 

Earlier I wrote,


> Where does "safety" enter the picture if you're using markers?





Sue Miller said:


> I'm using markers but I'm also using the e-collar.


You wrote of the use of markers and the Ecollar as if they were two completely separate things but now you put them together. Are you using them together? 



Sue Miller said:


> Praise reassures him that he did the right thing & relieves stress.


The cessation of the stim ALSO _"reassures [the dog] that he did the right thing & relieves stress."_ BTW praise is also used in my method. I wonder why people think that it's not. It's specifically mentioned in the articles. Have you read the links that I've supplied. 

Earlier I wrote,


> I don't think that "respect[ing]" a dog, or even being "clear, fair, calm [and] consistent" or "lov[ing]" him make you a "respected leader."





Sue Miller said:


> Oh, well I don't know what to say. I realize a dog is not a person but they are pack animals. They will work to avoid conflict.


What does _"avoid[ing] conflict"_ have to do with becoming a "respected leader?" A dog sometimes _"will work to avoid conflict"_ with another dog, a cat, some other animal, or another person. But that does not make that other animal or other person a _"respected leader."_ A person becomes a leader by being fair and just with the dog. That means using corrections that are fair (meaning the level of the correction fits the non–compliance. A fair and just leader does not consistently overcorrect the dog. I think that one must dominate a dog in order to be his leader. This does not have to be by force, rather it can be just by body language. Supplying food is but one aspect of it. For example, kennel workers used to feed my dogs when I went on vacation and the dogs _"avoided conflict"_ with them, but the dogs never regarded them as _"respected leaders."_ 

I don't think that it's accomplished by using markers, luring or things of that nature. Just about anyone with a treat can get just about any dog to sit. (I'm not talking here about problem dogs, just the average one [whatever that means]). But that does not make them the dog's _"respected leader."_ 

Earlier I wrote,


> As an aside, the number you're using [referring to the setting of the Ecollar] has nothing to do with anything. A "ten" is only indicative of the fact that you're higher than a 9 and lower than an 11. but it does not correspond to anything else. And the fact that's it's only a little bit up the scale also does not show anything.





Sue Miller said:


> I'm using the number as an indicator. Believe me Lou, I got into e-collar training 9 years ago & *I've seen & done it all. * [Emphasis added]


WOW! I mean * REALLY WOW! * I've been using Ecollars for about *20 years *now and I HAVE NOT _"seen & done it all."_ One of my friends is one of the best Ecollar trainers in the world. He's been using the tool for *about 25 years. *He trains the dogs that provide security for Presidents of the US and HE would never say this. I'm astounded that anyone would write this. I don't think I've ever seen anyone say this about anything in dog training! 

And the truth is that you have NOT used an Ecollar as I do for this problem. So I'll have to disagree with this very bold statement! AMAZING!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> You'd completely allow that I may have a point huh, Lol.


Steve of course you have a point, but I think that the validity of it and how much weight others should give it, is questionable for several reasons. Here's one of your statements,


> I can't help but think the results can be achieved just fine with the other components alone, but not with the ecollar alone.


You're saying that the dog in the video could NOT be changed with *just the Ecollar * and that _"just fine"_ results could have been gotten with *just the other methods.* If you'd tried the Ecollar method and had it fail, yes, your point would be well taken. But here you're just talking theory; what *you think *would happen with just the use of the Ecollar. OTOH, I'VE DONE IT and so have a few others. Heck you've not even read the supporting evidence I've provided. 



Steve Strom said:


> You're right I didnt read about Simon, I just accepted it was someone who'd followed your instructions and it was successful.


It's much more than that Steve. But I'll not waste my time telling you about it. Read it if you want. Don't if you don't want. But it's silly to draw conclusions from something that you've not even read. 



Steve Strom said:


> I've always thought you didnt correct a dog in times of fear or confusion, it would only make it worse.


It's also apparent that you've not read even my method of using the Ecollar to teach the recall or you'd not make such a statement. You don't know what I'm talking about. You read _"Ecollar"_ and you make an assumption about how I use it. It's not what you think, but you won't concede that point and so you keep saying the same thing over and over. But no matter how many times you say it, it DOES NOT APPLY. You're talking about using the Ecollar to correct this dog and I'm talking about something completely different. 



Steve Strom said:


> I guess that comes accross as a direct challenge to your use of the ecollar. *It's not. * [Emphasis added]


I think that *it is *a direct challenge based on the things you are saying. Such as this,


> … it makes it sound to me like *the ecollar is completely unnecessary. * Its just there for the sake of using it. Why isnt it just the food and luring that are getting the desired results? *What part exactly is the collar playing in it? * [Emphasis added]


The first part that I highlighted IS certainly a challenge to the use of the Ecollar. And when I explain why the Ecollar is used for this and provide supporting evidence. you don't read it! LOL 

And you've said this,


> It just seems like *using the ecollar * to create that comfort *is in itself stressful. * [Emphasis added]


This too is a challenge to the use of the Ecollar for this issue. When I respond that any method creates stress, you don't respond. 

When I quote one of the best behaviorists in the world, you don't know who he is and so you discount his comments and say that your theory may be better. If it was me, I'd be on Google finding out just who this guy is. But it seems that's too much work for you. When I tell you of his credentials, again, you don't respond. It seems that you're happy inside your box and unwilling to look outside of it. 

You've written this,


> Its like your going to have to do more to build the confidence and make the dog happy to be with you after you've defined the discomfort and the comfort to him anyway,


Another challenge to the use of the Ecollar! And so I posted a link so that you could see that your theory was wrong. But you could not be bothered to read it. 

And this,


> I'm just naturally skeptical of some of this and *would like to see it for myself * [Emphasis added]


So it seems that the ONLY evidence that you will accept is what you see with your own eyes. No else's experience is good enough for you. No one's video is good enough for you. You have to see it _"live and direct"_ to believe it. In all probability, you'll never see it because there are so few dogs who shutdown when corrected that will be treated by my method of fixing it. 

So let's admit that you ARE challenging my use of the Ecollar for this issue. Let's admit that you're mind is not open on this and let's admit that you are not willing to learn something new, OK? If this was not a challenge to my use of the Ecollar, you'd be reading the evidence that I've presented and looking up sources that you don't know, or at least asking about them. And you've be willing to learn about how this is done. Instead you're repeating similar statements over and over again that are based on your theory of Ecollar use that have nothing to do with how I use the tool for this issue.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Sonny -- lol, the handler and the dog sound like me and my white dog Ruby. We had alot of that going on for a while.

I personally really liked Kadi's advice. I've changed my negative verbal marker from "no" to "aut" which is frankly easier to say in a calm and clear manner.

Whenever I went a little too far with Ruby I'd usually take her back to doing things where she just won. Straight positive training in OB, playing throw the ball (this one did not retrieve well...in fact...I think her favorite game was keep away), doing some straight protection work with her...just let her win and be there as support.

I'm going to agree with the crowd that says that the ecollar probably isnt the best idea unless someone with experience is using it. Been there, done that...won the shame award. About three years ago I read some theory on ecollars, figured I could do it, and strapped one onto Ruby...did some OB, did a low correction and BAM. She ran away from me and eventually I had to pull her out from under my car where she was basically curled up and shaking. It was a while before we could move past that one.

I had no real idea what I was doing despite having read up on it...and I was using it on a dog that was too soft for it. To this day I wont strap one of those things on unless someone I trust with knowledge of the tool is standing right there with me and giving me instruction -- because that hands on experience is a MUCH better way to learn then reading.

So -- the point of that story...other then making me look like an inexperienced buffoon is to state that the ecollar is perhaps not the best tool in the hands of the inexperienced ESPECIALLY on a dog that is probably to soft to handle it. E-Collars are a super training tool...but I think they are equally destructive if not used properly....especially if on a dog that can't handle it.

I do think I kind of agree with the moving on thing too...but I understand if that's all you have. Circumstances ended up happening for me where Ruby is living as a fat, happy, pet dog with my ex and I am working a male GSD who could shape up to be pretty nice.

Just a little feedback from one whose been in the same kind of position.

~Cate


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

HI Cate,

I think your e-collar experience and observations are pretty
common. A great tool if used properly, but dangerous if misused. It is difficult to learn how to train dogs by watching videos or reading books or internet articles.
My personal opinion is, it is IMPOSSIBLE to learn how to properly use an e-collar that way. (note the use of the word
"properly")




Cate Helfgott said:


> Sonny -- lol, the handler and the dog sound like me and my white dog Ruby. We had alot of that going on for a while.
> 
> I personally really liked Kadi's advice. I've changed my negative verbal marker from "no" to "aut" which is frankly easier to say in a calm and clear manner.
> 
> ...


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> Steve of course you have a point, but I think that the validity of it and how much weight others should give it, is questionable for several reasons. Here's one of your statements,
> 
> You're saying that the dog in the video could NOT be changed with *just the Ecollar *and that _"just fine"_ results could have been gotten with *just the other methods.* If you'd tried the Ecollar method and had it fail, yes, your point would be well taken. But here you're just talking theory; what *you think *would happen with just the use of the Ecollar. OTOH, I'VE DONE IT and so have a few others. Heck you've not even read the supporting evidence I've provided.
> 
> ...


Sorry I don't know who Steve Lindsay is. My responce was to the one quote you used. Everything I've looked at seems to show the ecollar as one part of a plan. Even the video you linked describes it that way. I know that was in regards to a fearful dog, not the op's referenced dog that shut down. I'm sorry, but I thought James,Kadi, and especially Thomas addressed that better. 

I'm sure you can teach a fearful dog to recall or follow you with an ecollar as the obedience component to the plan, but as far as that being a rehabbed dog? I think the other components are where that comes in. 

In your recall method, you guide the dog with the line while gently stimming with the collar. Can't guiding the dog with the line be used without the collar?


----------



## Sue Miller (Jul 21, 2009)

Steve Strom said:


> Sorry I don't know who Steve Lindsay is. :-kquote]
> 
> Steven Lindsay is GOD! Not really--but the closest human to God if you want to learn about dog training and that's the truth. Read all of his books. I've spent 9 years travelling & working with all kinds of trainers, clubs & attending all kinds of seminars (financially we figured out a way that I didn't have to work just learn about dog training). I would be lacking half my knowledge if I hadn't studied every word Steven Lindsay wrote--he is a true genius.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Sue Miller said:


> I would be lacking half my knowledge if I hadn't studied every word Steven Lindsay wrote.


Great books indeed. Took me a while to round up the extra money for the three big volumes I have, but all worth it.

Still, this is getting pretty far afield from the O.P. 

Maybe a new Lindsay thread ....


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> I'm going to agree with the crowd that says that the ecollar probably isnt the best idea unless someone with experience is using it. Been there, done that...won the shame award.


Willing to bet a house payment that you weren't using my method! 



Cate Helfgott said:


> About three years ago I read some theory on ecollars, figured I could do it, and strapped one onto Ruby...did some OB, did a low correction and BAM. She ran away from me and eventually I had to pull her out from under my car where she was basically curled up and shaking. It was a while before we could move past that one.


Yep, I'm right. *I've long advocated against using the Ecollar like this. * Precisely for the possibility that you describe. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> I had no real idea what I was doing despite having read up on it...


You didn't read my site. lol. Making statements like this about Ecollars makes no sense to me. It's like seeing a hammer used to bash in someone's skull and then saying that hammers should not be used. I really can't figure out why people can't understand that there's more than just using the Ecollar to correct non-compliance. Perhaps it's a case of _"old habits die hard."_ 



Cate Helfgott said:


> and I was using it on a dog that was too soft for it.


I'll disagree based on the fact that I've never come across a dog _"that was too soft for it."_ The difference is that I show the dog how to control the stim and you did not. You just slapped it on your dog and when the dog disobeyed you pressed the button. The dog had no idea what was going on, knew only (as is frequently the case when the collar is not properly introduced) that something was hurting her and ran. Of course she was unable to get away from the pain since it was attached to her collar. I'll also suggest that no matter what the dial was set on, it was not a _"low correction"_ to your dog. What you think of the stim level is completely irrelevant! It's ONLY the dog's perception of the stim level that matters. 

I've taken these things and more, into account in my articles. They've been reviewed by people who are experienced in using the Ecollar and tested by quite a few pet owners. When a question arose that they didn't answer, I modified them. 

I'll guess that you, like some others, HAVE NOT READ my articles or you'd know that what you did with the Ecollar IS NOT what is being recommended here. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> To this day I wont strap one of those things on unless someone I trust with knowledge of the tool is standing right there with me and giving me instruction -- because that hands on experience is a MUCH better way to learn then reading.


For some it is. But I know many people who learn BETTER from reading than from watching videos or having a trainer at their elbow. I know quite a few people who choke in that situation and can't do anything right. My website has many unsolicited testimonials HERE from people who have never before used an Ecollar or trained a dog with any method, who read the articles and trained their dog to their complete satisfaction. But you probably won't read any of them either. LOL. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> but I think they are equally destructive if not used properly....especially if on a dog that can't handle it.


I've never come across a dog that _"can't handle"_ an Ecollar. Used as I advocate they're far gentler than a leash even used with a buckle collar.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> Sorry I don't know who Steve Lindsay is. My responce was to the one quote you used. Everything I've looked at seems to show the ecollar as one part of a plan. Even the video you linked describes it that way. I know that was in regards to a fearful dog, not the op's referenced dog that shut down. I'm sorry, but I thought James,Kadi, and especially Thomas addressed that better.


Steve the fact that you've not read the material I've provided has you only partially involved in in this discussion. Had you read those links you'd be up to speed. 



Steve Strom said:


> I'm sure you can teach a fearful dog to recall or follow you with an ecollar as the obedience component to the plan, but as far as that being a rehabbed dog? I think the other components are where that comes in.


You're wrong Steve. What you describe or think is going on is not all there is to it. 



Steve Strom said:


> In your recall method, you guide the dog with the line while gently stimming with the collar. Can't guiding the dog with the line be used without the collar?


There's MUCH MORE to this than just teaching the dog to follow you. In fact that's not even something that I teach. Had you read the information I'd supplied you'd know that. I'll try once more. If you'll read THIS you may understand. If you don't, I can pretty much guarantee that you won't. 

Using the Ecollar as I do builds a weak or fearful dog's confidence in a way that no other tool/method does.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

I'm really at a loss as to why we keep having this same conversation over and over again. If I had just made the suggestion "use the Ecollar" for this problem I'd understand. But instead of that I've been quite specific. I've said (to the effect) "use the Ecollar to teach the recall and the sit *in the specific way that I describe it HERE. and HERE. *It's not the way that Steve has described and it's not the way that Cate has described it. It's not the way that ANY of you have described it, except for Sue Miller and she's talked about "low stim" NOT what I've suggested for this. Rather I've said stim "at the level that the dog first feels." 

You folks keep talking about apples and I'm talking about oranges. Not the same thing at all. 

Perhaps if you'd address *what I'm talking about * instead of what you imagine or something else entirely, we'd be making some progress. Instead we're just going around in circles. 

That's probably going to require some reading of my site. It just takes a click to get there. But if you don't read at least some of what I'm referring you to, you won't get it. That's fine with me but then you're really not participating in this part of the conversation. It's sort of like coming in to the middle of a movie. You may be able to guess at what came before, but the chances of you getting it right are pretty slim. Help me out here, do some reading please. 

I’m reminded of an old joke. A man dies and goes up to heaven. When he meets face to face with his maker he says, _"God I lived a good life and everyday prayed to you to help me win the lottery. But you never did. Where did I go wrong? What did I do to make you abandon me?" _ 

God replied, _"Meet me halfway, buy a ticket."_ 

Apologies to any atheists (or anyone else) who are offended.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Hey Lou -- 

I'm afraid I'd never heard of you before I joined this forum...so I admit...no...I wasnt using your method. HOWEVER, the person whose articles I was reading (and god forbid...please dont ask the name...it was three years ago and my memory for the written word is horrific) was as convinced and confident in their theory and experience as you. I wouldnt have read it otherwise!

I think the simple matter is that I, not unlike many people, don't learn diddly squat by reading theory or articles. I knew this in college...and it was reflected in the substantial difference in my grades between my labratory classes and my book learning classes (I certainly wasnt the only one...lol, OH the bitch sessions we had!). I can read as much as I want..but if I dont actuallyget walked through the practice I dont really get it. Video helps some...but since the e-collar is such a muted correction from the standpoint of the handler/trainer it's hard even from that. Frankly...I know myself well enough to know that I'd never be able to use an e-collar properly by reading a method....I'm a visual learner...I need to be able to watch...and then participate in order to pick things up.

You can't understand why I said I had no real idea what I was doing despite having read up on it? That's exactly what I meant..it's quite clear...I assure you. I read articles written by confident trainers; folks not unlike yourself. I did that alot back then. What I learned was it doesn't matter if I read your articles, their's, or God's...it wouldnt make a difference because rather then seeing it done I'd be seeing words...words dont teach me how to train...seeing a method in action; having people talk me through it while I'm doing it do. Again...I realize not all folks are like this...but I dont think I'm alone in this.

You are absolutely right Lou on one point Lou. I didnt do it right. No amount of reading your articles would change that however. I'm not you. I can't reproduce your methods through words on my computer or on paper. If I watch you in some video's -- well...we're getting warmer...but still highly unlikely for _me_. I think the only way I could learn and reproduce your method properly would be to train with you and have you talk me through it regularly until I was confident enough to do it on my own.

I'm neither an expert, experienced or knowledgable when it comes to dogs. I was 21 then and an AVID reader...in the three years I know I have learned ALOT from going to trials and seminars and working with folks at my job, involved with my job or at the local clubs. I still feel uneducated....I'm perfectly willing to try out any method someone throws at me...but I will try it with someone experienced standing over my shoulder and talking me through it...not with the words of an article floating around and getting confused in my brain. 

I kinda feel like the circumstances of the handler the OP is speaking of and my own were not dissimiliar. I didnt have access to another dog, and my trainer gave me a chance and we kept fighting through it with a dog that wasnt entirely suited to the training. And I think what you need to remember is that neither she nor I are you, Lou. Back then (still not really all that much, though there has been an improvement), I didnt have your knowledge, your experience, your muscle memory, your reflexes or your ability to read a dog. Without all that I could never have done your method properly just based on an article I read. I could intellectually know the theory....but the physical aspect of making it happen wouldnt come out right because I'm just not that good....and what's worse...I'd do it wrong...and continue to do it wrong because there wouldn't be someone experienced there to tell me when and where I'd screwed up!

I have stage fright like none other...lol, ask Dave or Matt...even Mike I think has probably seen me do it a time or two...I turn into a headless chicken trying to train in front of people...it's a weird sort of hectic "OH SHIT I'm screwing up and they can see it!" thing. It's the bain of my existance as an officer in the army...but I've also learned that if I do something enough to become comfortable with it the stage fright basically goes away. Do some people learn better through reading? Yeah...that's probably true....but again...what happens when they make a mistake trying to implement theory and end up screwing a dog up because no one is there to tell them they messed up, what they messed up and when they messed up?

No Lou...like I said...I'm not a read-learner. Therefore I haven't read your articles...nor will I I'm afraid...I know myself well enough to know I simply _can't _no matter how many times you put them out there. I'd be happy for you to show me though. I dont have a huge amount of space in my trailer...but I can cook a mean dinner and bake an excellent pie for desert...and I dont imagine my ex would mind too much coming down with Ruby for a visit.

I'm sorry that my experiences are in conflict with yours....and that my method of learning doesnt coincide with how you want folks to learn...but things are what they are and I am what I am. And frankly, I can't imagine I am the only one.

I am in general the advocate of the E-Collar...if used properly. I generally trust the folks around me to show me what 'properly' is...so that when I am ready to use one with the dog I'm working now, I have someone with me telling me and showing me what to do and how to do it right.

~Cate


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

I actually wanted to add one thing....I probably should have said this up front...because now that I read my post I realize it sums it up quite nicely.

I promise I am not arguing whether or not your method is a good one or not. I havent read it...and frankly...even if I had I wouldnt have the comprehension to argue either way.

The point I am _trying_ to make is that your method might not be the best for everyone..._not_ because it is a bad method...but because you arent there to show a person how to implement. I'm in VA and you aren't, ergo your method isnt the best method for me because you arent here to teach it. Video might help a little....but I'd still want someone there to watch and point out the mistakes I make before they become a detriment to my dog.

I could probably go to seminar...but then again...I couldn't afford the travel or the expense right now I'm afraid. Consequence of having graduated College a little over a year ago :sad:...I'd need more hands on time then a seminar can afford anyway. Maybe a camp...a free camp with free lodging!  Buuuuut, since that is unlikely, like I said...I have people here I trust...and therefore their method is going to be the way I go unless something bad happens in which case I'll have to find another.

~Cate

PS...Will cook for training


----------



## Al Curbow (Mar 27, 2006)

Cate, it's spelled out in perfect detail. Like you i was hesitant to use the ecollar and also like you visuals help me a lot, unlike you the visuals help me because i'm not that bright. So i printed it out and did a few dry runs with my bride holding the paper and pointing out dry run mistakes. I then started with my dog AJ and the dog hasn't had a leash on in a few years. My 2 yr old hasn't needed a leash for 6 months and remember i take a dog with me everywhere i go. I'm far from being a good trainer so i'm one happy guy that i read Lou's protocols with the ecollar. For me the proof is what i see in front of me, it's quick and easy for me AND the dog, i like that. Here's my youngest at about 13 months old, fast recall on him using Lou's method. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji1jqq48G6s You can't see it in the video but there were a bunch of seriously chaseable geese behind and to the left of me, lol


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Al Curbow said:


> Cate, it's spelled out in perfect detail. Like you i was hesitant to use the ecollar and also like you visuals help me a lot, unlike you the visuals help me because i'm not that bright. So i printed it out and did a few dry runs with my bride holding the paper and pointing out dry run mistakes. I then started with my dog AJ and the dog hasn't had a leash on in a few years. My 2 yr old hasn't needed a leash for 6 months and remember i take a dog with me everywhere i go. I'm far from being a good trainer so i'm one happy guy that i read Lou's protocols with the ecollar. For me the proof is what i see in front of me, it's quick and easy for me AND the dog, i like that. Here's my youngest at about 13 months old, fast recall on him using Lou's method. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji1jqq48G6s You can't see it in the video but there were a bunch of seriously chaseable geese behind and to the left of me, lol


It could be clear as crystal. I'm not going to do it without someone there to correct me. I'm too damn scared of making mistakes and I am quite frankly unwilling to to try it without experienced people there with me.

I understand that it worked well for you, and for other people...but I've seen how badly an e-collar used improperly can hurt my relationship with my dog....and I havent any confidence in my ability to translate words into actions. I'd be nervous...and that would make my converting word to action worse. I just dont do that well. I've got a photographic memory forwhen I'm paying attention to situations...but I dont translate words well. It's always ended up....awkward...that would be a kind word.

If that makes me hardheaded or ignorant then that's okay...because I need to do what's best for me and my dogs...I generally know whats best for me...and the guys working my dog now are doing a good job getting the results I need their way...and while I havent felt the need to work my current GSD in an E-Collar...when I do make that jump it is again going to be with the assistance of the people not only instructing me but making sure I am not getting it all screwed up.

I do this when I cook too...and I'm a pretty good cook. I learn first time when I watch my Dad or when he tells me what to do...if I follow a recipie though I generally take three of four tries before I get it right...and even then I somtimes have to call Dad to walk me through things...espeically with traditional Italian meals that require a touch that is theoretically crystal clear on paper but reaaally hard for me to get unless seen....like what the pasty texture of a Carbonnara Sauce needs to be prior to throwing the hot pasta in. I have experienced the frequent need to throw things away on the first go arounds. That's pretty easy...hard to throw away or restart with a dog when you've mucked something up...it is basically why I am cautious and caution other folks like me when doing something new with ANY kind of training tool.

Sorry if that's a kinda crazy way to look at it...but it's the closest thing my brain could correlate too.

~Cate


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Al Curbow said:


> Cate, it's spelled out in perfect detail. Like you i was hesitant to use the ecollar and also like you visuals help me a lot, unlike you the visuals help me because i'm not that bright. So i printed it out and did a few dry runs with my bride holding the paper and pointing out dry run mistakes. I then started with my dog AJ and the dog hasn't had a leash on in a few years. My 2 yr old hasn't needed a leash for 6 months and remember i take a dog with me everywhere i go. I'm far from being a good trainer so i'm one happy guy that i read Lou's protocols with the ecollar. For me the proof is what i see in front of me, it's quick and easy for me AND the dog, i like that. Here's my youngest at about 13 months old, fast recall on him using Lou's method. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji1jqq48G6s You can't see it in the video but there were a bunch of seriously chaseable geese behind and to the left of me, lol


Al,

The point that most of us are making was, not that you can't teach the recall with an ecollar but that using an ecollar to deal with the dog "shutting down" wasn't the best (or only) solution.
Nice dog with a nice attitude and fast recall BUT you may have taught his recall with an e collar but his motivation is the ball in your hand. I guarantee if you corrected him with a e collar if he wasn't fast enough, your dog would shut down too. There is always more than one way to skin a cat
but anyone that thinks his/hers is the only one is a .........................wait for it.....PUSSY

Get it, skin a cat...pussy
I crack myself up sometimes


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Hey Al, I agree with Thomas. I think you're modestly giving too much credit to the collar and not all the other parts you've used to build that nice recall. I bet AJ would come in every bit as fast just believing the ball is going to be there.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou, I read the links. I think the collar is a great tool for corrections. Thanks.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> I think the simple matter is that I, not unlike many people, don't learn diddly squat by reading theory or articles.


I've just modified the warning that's on the Articles Page of my site to add this,


> If you're the kind of person who has great difficulty in following written instructions this is probably not the best place for you to learn to use an Ecollar. Consider finding a trainer in your area who uses my methods.





Cate Helfgott said:


> Frankly...I know myself well enough to know that I'd never be able to use an e-collar properly by reading a method....I'm a visual learner...I need to be able to watch...and then participate in order to pick things up.


I wonder then, if you knew this, why did you try to learn to use the Ecollar by reading some articles? Is it possible that you did not accurately follow the instructions? 

In any case, all that means is that this method of learning is not for you. That doesn't mean that others can't learn this way or that the Ecollar is not the best tool for solving this issue. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> Do some people learn better through reading? Yeah...that's probably true....but again...what happens when they make a mistake trying to implement theory and end up screwing a dog up because no one is there to tell them they messed up, what they messed up and when they messed up?


Using my method it takes A LOT of badly timed stims, A LOT of poorly executed movements and A LOT of errors to _"screw up a dog."_ I think that if even ONE PERSON had _"screwed up [their] dog"_ when trying to use my methods that I'd have heard about it. Human nature being what it is, they'd have written about it on some forum, and, more than likely, it would have gotten back to me. But to my knowledge nothing of the sort has happened. If any of you have seen it please let me know. 

The stim level is so low, where the dog first feels it, that it's all but impossible to _"screw up a dog"_ with my methods. When you start raising the level as do those who only use the Ecollar to punish undesired behavior or for non–compliance, timing and getting–it–right–the–first–time become more and more important. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> I'm sorry that my experiences are in conflict with yours....


I’m not. I'd much rather that you disagreed as long as you have an open mind and can stay polite and professional. If we all agreed there'd not be much point in these forums.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> I promise I am not arguing whether or not your method is a good one or not. I havent read it...and frankly...even if I had I wouldnt have the comprehension to argue either way.


I understand completely. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> The point I am _trying_ to make is that your method might not be the best for everyone..._not_ because it is a bad method...but because you arent there to show a person how to implement.


That makes sense if someone finds it impossible to learn this sort of thing from the written page. But in my experience that situation is quite rare. Most people won't get it perfect the first time and so I tell people to read the articles, practice without the dog, read the articles again and only then, to try the training. I also suggest that people read the articles again AFTER they've done a session to see what they've missed so they can do it next time. People are so afraid of Ecollars because of all the myths and misconceptions that abound, they tend to go slowly and make sure that they're doing it correctly. Lots of people have told me that they're afraid to try the protocols because they don't want to mess up or cause undue discomfort to their dogs. Many of them have written to me and told me how easy it was once they got into it and that they realize that their fears were groundless.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Al Curbow said:


> Cate, it's spelled out in perfect detail. Like you i was hesitant to use the ecollar and also like you visuals help me a lot, unlike you the visuals help me because i'm not that bright. So i printed it out and did a few dry runs with my bride holding the paper and pointing out dry run mistakes.


Thanks for jumping in again Al. I'm gonna take Cate's word for it that she isn't able to learn from the printed page. Apparently there's some kind of block that she's not going to overcome anytime soon. I understand this as for years I could not get college chemistry. I'd read the page and as soon as I turned to the next page, I'd have forgotten what I just read. Years later something had changed and it was all so simple. I can't explain the change or the block, but it was if a veil had been lifted.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> The point that most of us are making was, not that you can't teach the recall with an ecollar but that using an ecollar to deal with the dog "shutting down" wasn't the best (or only) solution.


*No one *has said that it's _"the only"_ solution, just that *it's the best one! *I wonder why some keep repeating this _"only way"_ statement as if ANYONE had said it? Thomas, since you've never used an Ecollar in this fashion or for this issue, you, like some others, are just talking theory. And as you've written, _"Talk is cheap and theories are great."_ OTOH I've done this several times and had great success. So have others who have used this method. 

IN FACT at a seminar I did in MI many years back I worked with a dog that another Ecollar trainer had put into complete shutdown. I knew that there was such a dog going to be brought to the seminar but did not know which dog it was. At the end of the seminar I asked the person who put on the seminar _"Where was that shutdown dog you told me would be here?"_ She replied, _"It was that black lab."_ Turns out that I'd worked with the dog on the sit but didn't adapt the method especially to him at all. He learned just as did the other dogs. And, I'm told that his confidence came up by a great deal. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Nice dog with a nice attitude and fast recall BUT *you may have taught his recall with an e collar * [Emphasis added]


Al _*"may have taught *the recall with an e collar?"_ Hmmm it seems to me that Al is *quite clear *that he taught the dog to recall with the Ecollar. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> but his motivation is the ball in your hand.


I'm sure that PART of Al's dog's motivation is the ball in his hand. But I'm just as sure that another part of it is the Ecollar. Before I started combining methods I used the Ecollar just by itself. I got recalls that were just this fast. Then, the only motivation was the Ecollar. This is just so much more theory and we know how you feel about that! lol



Thomas Barriano said:


> *I guarantee *if you corrected him with a e collar if he wasn't fast enough, your dog would shut down too. [Emphasis added]


Sounds like more theory to me. ROFL The reality is that you're probably quite wrong. I've never had a dog shut down when my method of using the Ecollar is in play. 

I have little doubt that if YOU corrected this dog with an Ecollar as YOU probably use it _"if he wasn't fast enough"_ he'd probably shut down. But it's not the case with my methods. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> There is always more than one way to skin a cat
> but anyone that thinks his/hers is the only one is a .........................wait for it.....PUSSY


Again, *NO ONE *has said that "there is only one way."


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> Hey Al, I agree with Thomas. I think you're modestly giving too much credit to the collar and not all the other parts you've used to build that nice recall. I bet AJ would come in every bit as fast just believing the ball is going to be there.


I bet if Al was to show us some video of his dog recalling when he did not have the ball, we'd see the dog coming in just as fast. Al do you have any video like that? 

Interesting that when Bart Bellon or anyone else for that matter, shows his work and he's holding a toy, no one makes statements like this. lol


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> Lou, I read the links. I think the collar is a great tool for corrections. Thanks.


Great Steve. You're right but there's so much more than just _"corrections!"_ 

It's also a great tool for teaching new behaviors, rehabilitating fearful or shutdown dogs, stopping dogs from chasing animals while–at–the–same–time NOT making them fearful of those animals, and more. 

No other tool allows for off–leash incremental punishment AND incremental reinforcement to give clear communication with the dog.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I think your e-collar experience and observations are pretty
> common. A great tool if used properly, but dangerous if misused.


Dangerous? Perhaps from the standpoint of creating problems if not used correctly or at high levels only to punish. But as far as physical danger, I'll disagree. The Ecollar is about the only tool that exists in dog training that can't cause physical injury. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> It is difficult to learn how to train dogs by watching videos or reading books or internet articles.


It is for some. It's not for others. Witness the huge number of dog training videos and books that exist. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> My personal opinion is, it is IMPOSSIBLE to learn how to properly use an e-collar that way. (note the use of the word
> "properly")


There are a pretty large number of Ecollar users who disagree. Many of the people who have written the unsolicited testimonials on my website have never used an Ecollar and yet they are happy with their results. I think they'd say that they were using the tool _"properly."_ 

I don't know specifically what you mean by _"properly"_ but it seems to me that if one is getting their desired results and not causing the dog any undue stress or discomfort, it fits the definition. If you have some other definition, perhaps you can be more specific?


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Hey Lou -

you'll have to bear with me...I'm responding from my phone so am kind of limited in what I can do.

I want to preface this with I stating that I don't really fear the E-collar. I think it's a good training tool that needs to be used properly. What I do fear is what Cate + ECollar could muck up together (or folks like me).

You wonder why I tried to learn through reading? Because three years ago I simply didn't know better...that's something I learned about myself when I started training dogs. I'm an intensley voracious reader...and I know alot of theory as a result of reading in the past. I've used theory in learning most things I've picked up to date. I'd never had a problem in the past self-teaching sewing, InDesign and Layout graphics, quilting, Photoshop, drawing, graphic design, genetics, basic HTML, photography, dancing, music, cooking, marketing, etc. I'm actually pretty good at most things I do after trying things enough. However dog training is a different animal. You can screw up once or twice and a forgiving dog will be none the worse...but do it enough times and your going to mess something up. Again...it's not a skill like cooking where you can keep beating at it, throwing the bad results away, and starting again until you get it right.

I wouldn't call that a block that I'm not trying to overcome. I'd call that being realistic and pragmatic enough to have figured out my own limits. Part of it is the translation between my head and my hands...and frequently it's a mental issue that has to do with me being distracted by little birdies. 

I wonder at you calling it not the only solution...but the best one. Does that make it the only best one? I think we can both agree it is not the best for me. For me it is a method...a possibility in many should I gain the instruction but certainly not the best the way things stand now. Can you not concieve of a dog and handler team that this method might not be the best for? You said you've come accross few folks who learn the way I do (folks for whom your method is not ideal). Perhaps I'm the first you've spoken too with this issue. I am clearly an uncommon occurance in your experience. An anomoly so to speak. Can you not concieve of the possibility that there may be a dog you haven't come accross, who, not unlike me, is an anomoly and would not be a good candidate for your training method?

Hope this clarifies my position some.

V/R

-Cate


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> I bet if Al was to show us some video of his dog recalling when he did not have the ball, we'd see the dog coming in just as fast. Al do you have any video like that?
> 
> Interesting that when Bart Bellon or anyone else for that matter, shows his work and he's holding a toy, no one makes statements like this. lol


I can only answer for myself, but I've never made a statement about Bart Bellon. I think theres no doubt AJ would recall just as fast at this point without Al having a ball visible. I bet he could take him through an entire ob routine without the ball being visible and AJ just anticipating that balls gonna appear any minute now.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> I want to preface this with I stating that I don't really fear the E-collar. I think it's a good training tool that needs to be used properly. What I do fear is what Cate + ECollar could muck up together (or folks like me).


Cate first of all please don't get the impression that I'm trying to talk you into anything. I've spoken to lots of people who say this same thing. Using the level of stim that I advocate it's all but impossible to mess up a dog. If you're timing is bad or you can't do the manipulations well all that happens is it takes more reps for the dog to learn. If I was using stim at any level but where the dog first perceives it I'd consider that this could cause the dog undue stress and pain. But since it's down at the level where it's only annoying, I can't get too upset over it. 

If you've any other method to train a dog you had to have some degree of timing and the ability to manipulate things such as a leash a clicker, etc. The Ecollar is far easier to use. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> You wonder why I tried to learn through reading? Because three years ago I simply didn't know better
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> I think theres no doubt AJ would recall just as fast at this point without Al having a ball visible. I bet he could take him through an entire ob routine without the ball being visible and AJ just anticipating that balls gonna appear any minute now.


As much as Al's dog is _"anticipating that ball[']s gonna appear any minute now"_ he's anticipating that as long as he obeys the commands he's avoiding a stim. 

There are always two sides to the coin.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> As much as Al's dog is _"anticipating that ball[']s gonna appear any minute now"_ he's anticipating that as long as he obeys the commands he's avoiding a stim.
> 
> There are always two sides to the coin.


I'll give him the ball.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

I think I might actually try to quote you here.



Lou Castle said:


> I think, by definition that's the case. You can't have two _best _things; if one is the best, then all else is NOT the best.
> 
> We can agree on that but that doesn't change what is the best solution for the dog. You may not be able to implement it for one reason or another but that does not change what would be the best answer for this problem for this dog.


Ok -- so it may be the best solution for fluffy....given that fluffy isnt the same kind of mutant I am. It's still not the best solution for the situation and you need to keep that in mind. 



Lou Castle said:


> Compare this situation to a health condition. The medical community will generally agree that "X" is the best treatment. Of course some will disagree, just as we see here. But that does not change what is the best treatment. Speaking philosophically, only _"the universe"_ knows what is the best treatment. Perhaps the patient can not afford what the medicall community says is the best treatment. That does not mean that it's not the best, only that the patient can't put it into practice.


I really like this particular paragraph...it reminds me of one of my Daddy-isms (I say these alot)....one of the things my father has always told me is that there is a difference between truth and fact. Truth is what we believe...like who we think would be best in office or what we think is the 'best' method of training....an opinion really. Fact is that water is made out of two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen...or that the world is round. A truth may be widely, or even universally accepted but it's not scientifically factual. 

What your saying here is that your method is not factually the best method out there...but that you and many others believe it to be so....it may even be 'universally accepted' as the best method...but it was also 'universally accepted' that the world was flat at one point in time. If it's not factually the best...then perhaps you should call it 'the best method I've found' or 'the best method in my opinion'...rather then 'the best method'.



Lou Castle said:


> A couple of times I've written this, _"I’m sure that somewhere there's a dog out there that my methods won't work well with. But in over 3,000 dogs I've not come across him."_ Perhaps you can suggest the type of dog that you think would not be a good candidate and why?


Some pet dogs that go belly up or turn into a puddle of goo at the idea of being somewhere new, being touched, or even so far as being verbally corrected by their owner and others come to mind. I think my Ruby and maybe even my Leo might be two others. But there's only one real way to know Lou. My offer still stands...my place is nothing shiney being as old and out in BFE as it is...but I make a mean meal. You could very well prove me wrong, and I'm perfectly willing to accept that 

Just another thing I've been thinking about for the last couple of days...but is there a refereed Journal for Canine Training methods? 

V/R

~Cate


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> I'll give him the ball.


Sometimes giving the ball is appropriate and sometimes it's not.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Earlier I wrote,


> We can agree on that but that doesn't change what is the best solution for the dog. You may not be able to implement it for one reason or another but that does not change what would be the best answer for this problem for this dog.





Cate Helfgott said:


> Ok -- so it may be the best solution for fluffy....given that fluffy isnt the same kind of mutant I am. It's still not the best solution for the situation and you need to keep that in mind.


Situations come and go. I've given the owner of this dog a guarantee that if my method doesn't work on this dog using my methods I'll give back the purchase price of the Ecollar. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> What your saying here is that your method is not factually the best method out there...but that you and many others believe it to be so....it may even be 'universally accepted' as the best method...but it was also 'universally accepted' that the world was flat at one point in time. If it's not factually the best...then perhaps you should call it 'the best method I've found' or 'the best method in my opinion'...rather then 'the best method'.


For future reference just about everything I write, unless I’m quoting someone or stating a scientific fact, is my opinion. Just as is the case with everyone else. I don't think that I, or anyone else, needs to give that disclaimer with every post. 

Earlier I wrote,


> Perhaps you can suggest the type of dog that you think would not be a good candidate and why?





Cate Helfgott said:


> Some pet dogs that go belly up or turn into a puddle of goo at the idea of being somewhere new, being touched, or even so far as being verbally corrected by their owner and others come to mind.


I've worked with a dog like the first one you describe at one of my seminars and with two with the "touch sensitivity" that you describe with private clients. The owners of both of the latter dogs had tried clickers and not gotten good results. The noise of the clicker scared the dogs. They had tried other noises but nothing gave them the results they wanted. The dogs learned the recall, sit, down and place at only a slightly slower speed than other dogs. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> But there's only one real way to know Lou. My offer still stands...my place is nothing shiney being as old and out in BFE as it is...but I make a mean meal. You could very well prove me wrong, and I'm perfectly willing to accept that


Don't think I'm gonna trip to VA show you Cate. lol. But you're welcome to come out here.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Cate , he must not have seen your tattoos yet . 

Your place plus dinner ??!!!!!


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

if he did...he might become speechless...


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Are Cate's tattoos what all the tattoo talk has been about? I've seen that posted a few times and haven't figured out who you guys were talking about. Earlier I thought it was Carol.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Aww Lou! Like I stated earlier...I'm a relatively poor recent college grad in desperate need of a car (the PT has grown too small and does not handle the snow well O,o)...which is about where all my current funds are going to get blown on. I just cant see myself affording the flight, not to mention the cost of room and board.

Jim -- that was my offer...and one of my pumpkin pies or rolls for desert! Will -- is that a bad thing or a good thing O,o

Nicole -- I have a pic of my Tat posted on another board...it goes from left hip up to left ribs. I havent been able to get Carol to show hers but I'm really trying!

And Lou -- I wanted to add just one more point. You said this : 


Lou Castle said:


> For future reference just about everything I write, unless I’m quoting someone or stating a scientific fact, is my opinion. Just as is the case with everyone else. I don't think that I, or anyone else, needs to give that disclaimer with every post.


...and I'm really glad you did. The reason being that in the past you've come accross in such a way that it _seemed_ you were stating your method as factually the best. I understand now this isnt the case...but internet limits us severely in terms of tone....because we're reading and interpreting on our own without having any actual physical discussion. I dont believe I'm the only mutant in this case as I've spoken to others (many whom read but do not post on this board) who feel the same.

It might be a pain in the tookie...but a simple 'in my opinion', while no longer necessary in my mind, might help relieve some of the tone of your posts, and may breed less conflict regarding discussions with you in the end. JMHO.

~Cate


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> Sometimes giving the ball is appropriate and sometimes it's not.


Yeah, you're right. Just like the ecollar.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> ... ...and I'm really glad you did. The reason being that in the past you've come accross in such a way that it _seemed_ you were stating your method as factually the best ... but internet limits us severely in terms of tone....because we're reading and interpreting on our own without having any actual physical discussion. I dont believe I'm the only mutant in this case as I've spoken to others (many whom read but do not post on this board) who feel the same. ...


A trainer I know maintains that Lou could easily sell snow to Eskimos. He says it admiringly, BTW. :lol:

But in fact, selling or not, as Lou says:
_
For future reference just about everything I write, unless I’m quoting someone or stating a scientific fact, is my opinion. Just as is the case with everyone else. I don't think that I, or anyone else, needs to give that disclaimer with every post._

We can all insert that disclaimer into almost every post by almost everyone, whether they sell what they are discussing or not.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Cate Helfgott said:


> understand now this isnt the case...but internet limits us severely in terms of tone....because we're reading and interpreting on our own without having any actual physical discussion.


This is very true....


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> And Lou -- I wanted to add just one more point. You said this :
> 
> 
> > For future reference just about everything I write, unless I’m quoting someone or stating a scientific fact, is my opinion. Just as is the case with everyone else. I don't think that I, or anyone else, needs to give that disclaimer with every post.
> ...


Cate I've heard this before. I don't care for the phrase, _"IMO."_ I think it weakens what an author has just written. Instead I often use the phrase, _"I think …"_ Here are some highlighted examples. 

I wrote in my very first post in this thread,


> *I think * that the Ecollar used as I advocate, is the ideal tool for this dog.


I repeated that statement just a couple of posts later in an exchange with James Downey. 

I've written,


> *I think * that he DOES care that the correction comes from the handler. If my methods are used the dog learns that the stim comes from his behavior.





> I only mention Ecollars when *I think * that they'll provide the desired results.





> *I think * that this situation, shutting down, is part of the _"fight or flight syndrome."_





> *I think * it's a lack of confidence combined with over–sensitivity.





> *I think *clarity comes from making things as obvious as possible to the dog; blacks and whites.


I use the phrase about 8-12 more times (I lost count). So I really don't understand those who make this comment. 

There are MANY who give suggestions about how to fix this dog's issues who DO NOT write with such a disclaimer but I don't see people making this same comment about them. Reading back thorugh the thread it seems that this criticism is ONLY applied if people disagree with the suggestion. In fact some are quite vigorous in their comments. Here are some highlighted examples. 

In the first response in the thread, regarding the question of using the Ecollar, Ted wrote,


> It can be done, but *you really need to be a pro to do it … Don't use it if your not a pro on this type of case, you'll do more damage than good, *


Molly wrote,


> I agree with Bob, don't put any sort of force on this dog, and don't use the e-collar


Here's a comment from someone else who shall be unnamed,


> Dobermanns are highly intelligent and don't respond well to the typical cookie cutter GSD Schutzhund training.
> 
> Dobermanns are also handler sensitive and don't respond well to corrections when they don't understand the exercise they are being corrected for OR think the correction is unfair …
> 
> shutting down...stop the corrections! Start building a relationship based on operant conditioning. *Forget about e-collars in this application. *


The first several comments are generalizations that are often not true and really have nothing to do with the topic. Then comes the advice. Nowhere is there a clue that this is someone's opinion. 

Anne wrote,


> This can be dealt with through escape training.
> … I'd stop training the dog. It's unfair to the dog to force it to do something it isn't really able to do.


Chris wrote,


> quit with the OB for awhile and just play fetch with the dog. Go hiking and just become buds with him again. Then introduce OB again with things he knows very well. The dog will be back working in no time.


And there are many more examples of this. I don't see even a hint that these were opinion in any of these statements. It only seems to be the _less popular suggestion _ or perhaps it's just my posts (po me – lol) that people need this disclaimer for. It also seems that if the suggestion is _ run of the mill _ or at least it's NOT an Ecollar that it's not needed. 

But I'm quite a bit off topic here.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> Yeah, you're right. Just like the ecollar.


That's why I ONLY suggest it when I think that it's a good solution; as in this case.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> A trainer I know maintains that Lou could easily sell snow to Eskimos. He says it admiringly, BTW.


The fact is that some 'skimos NEED snow. lol

Another disclaimer is necessary I think. I do sell Ecollars. I'm a dealer for Dogtra. 

But I was an advocate for Ecollars, at this same PITA level, long before I started selling them. I give a very deep discount because I want to make it as easy as possible for people to own and use them, That's why I started selling them. 

If anyone thinks that this line of advice is a marketing scheme to line my pockets, sorry to disappoint. Selling Ecollars costs me money. Not even considering the time I spend in writing these posts, just the time I donate to people who ask for help with them, it's a money losing proposition. 

I push Ecollars because I love dogs and want their training to be as easy as it can be.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Hiya Lou -- 

I can certainly understand where you're coming from, and I do see your point.

I guess the best way I can explain it ties back into the way the internet and the written word limit tone based on the way each individual writes and expresses themselves. Adding phrases like JMO soften the tone of a discussion and help to make it feel a little more modest, which in my mind strengthens the point of view because it makes it more amenable to the folks reading it.

I'm sorry -- it's not that I meant to make you defend yourself in this matter...it was offered more as an friendly suggestion based off my limited experience reading and typing with you.

V/R

~Cate


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

No worries Cate. I didn't feel defensive I was just pointing out that I've done something similar to what you suggested, but it doesn't make any difference. 

I've always written in this fashion, using _"I think …"_ in place of _"IMO"_, I but still get this comment. Perhaps it's my cop based _"No BS style"_ or my confidence that the Ecollar will work in every situation that I suggest it for (which as I've said repeatedly, is NOT every situation) I don't know. I've gotten over being concerned about it.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> That's why I ONLY suggest it when I think that it's a good solution; as in this case.


I still don't think so, but thanks for taking the time you did on it Lou.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

You're welcome Steve. Can you please tell us why you don't think the Ecollar is a good option?


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> You're welcome Steve. Can you please tell us why you don't think the Ecollar is a good option?


Because starting the stim to show him he’s doing something wrong is a correction and correcting a fearful dog is counter to what I’ve been taught. I think an environmental correction is even more harmful to a scared dog and the opposite of what you would want to be doing. I used the ecollar to proof my dog on the retrieve over the jump and a-frame. Its an environmental correction and makes him wonder wth? It becomes clear when I take him back and over the jump then reward him. He’s not fearful, so it’s easy to overcome the confusion.
In your article it says the dog more then likely will think the ground was hot or he got bit when you stim him and he’s going to run right past you. Once he settles down, you repeat. You are also guiding him with the flexie lead. At some point he’s going to figure out it’s a safe zone staying next to you and become a velcro dog and you have another method to fix that. I think that’s unnecessary.
I think it would be just as easy to guide the dog in without the ecollar and reward him when he does. If stopping the stim is rewarding to the dog, a good boy could be enough if he doesn’t want food or a toy. I think you can accomplish confidence building, clear obedience training that will teach the dog engaging with you at anything, anywhere is a comfort zone without the ecollar. I don’t think you can do that with just the ecollar alone.
I didn’t want to discuss your testimonials because I don’t think it would be fair to do on a forum. My first thought was, these are people that even though they may have tried many other things they were never consistant enough. You were able to lay out a clear plan with attention to small details (like which hand to put the flexi in) they were able to follow so their dogs succeded at it. The dog benefited from clear obedience, but not because of the ecollar.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> Because starting the stim to show him he’s doing something wrong is a correction and correcting a fearful dog is counter to what I’ve been taught.


Thanks for the detailed description of why you think that this will not work on this dog. As I've said, you (and some others) are talking are theory (and now philosophy too) and I've done it quite a few times. I've done it with dogs that have shutdown due to being overcorrected and I've done it with dogs that are fear–aggressive. 

If I was working at any stim level other than where the dog first feels the stim I might agree with the philosophy that says not to correct until the dog understands the behavior. But we're talking of the level of discomfort that a dog probably gets from a single flea bite. This is certainly LESS discomfort that he gets from any leash correction. This is probably a "fairness issue" with many people and perhaps you as well. You are welcome to your philosophy but realize that's all it is. 



Steve Strom said:


> I think an environmental correction is even more harmful to a scared dog and the opposite of what you would want to be doing. I used the ecollar to proof my dog on the retrieve over the jump and a-frame. Its an environmental correction and makes him wonder wth? It becomes clear when I take him back and over the jump then reward him. He’s not fearful, so it’s easy to overcome the confusion.


I doubt that you were using the Ecollar at the level that I was using Steve. If you were, more than likely your dog would not even consider it to be a _"correction."_ He'd just think that he was bitten by a flea and might scratch his neck. More than likely you were quite a bit up the scale and causing quite a bit do discomfort, perhaps even to the pain level. If you disagree, please tell us how you found the level of stim that you were using and what brand/model of Ecollar you were using. 



Steve Strom said:


> In your article it says the dog more then likely will think the ground was hot or he got bit when you stim him and he’s going to run right past you.


I've just revised the site. It used to say (as you quoted) that the dog is _"going to *run * right past you."_ That may have you thinking that the dog _is afraid _of the hot ground and that he's running from it. Instead of this thought, picture a dog lying in the sun who decides that it's too hot. He doesn't get up and *run to the shade. *Rather he * ambles * at a walking pace, often well below a walking place, to it. 

In any case, the site now says that the dog is _"going to *walk *right past you at about the same speed that he was moving in response to the leash pull."_ That is a more accurate description of the situation. Lest you think that I'm _"cheating"_ on this note that just above the statement that you cited it says this, _"As soon as he starts *to walk * towards you, that is, he takes 4–5 steps *in response to the pulling pressure of the Flexi …" * _ [Emphasis added] No one can pull, with one hand, a dog into a running speed. 



Steve Strom said:


> I think it would be just as easy to guide the dog in without the ecollar and reward him when he does.


That's true and if we were teaching the recall that might be a good way to start it. but we're not just teaching the recall. We're doing the first step of rehabilitating a dog that's in shut down. Merely rewarding him for responding to a leash pull won't do anything towards that end. And, in fact, this dog probably would not be interested in a treat, toy or praise at all! Dog in shutdown rarely are interested in such things. I've seen dogs in shutdown that simply stay laying down on the ground (as was the situation with this dog). They don't respond to the leash pull by getting up and moving. Instead they wind up being dragged across the ground. It was a leash pop that put the dog into that situation. He's liable to think that the leash pull (alone – without the stim) is more of the same! But with the introduction of the stim he now has a reason to move and because the stim has been added, it's significantly different to him; a whole new context. 

In your scenario both of these acts, the leash pulling and the reward come from the handler. The dog knows exactly what caused it. That's not the case with the Ecollar stim. At first the dog thinks that it came from the ground. Sometimes they think it's a bug biting them. But either way, it DID NOT come from the handler. And that's going to be important just a little bit later when teaching the sit. 



Steve Strom said:


> If stopping the stim is rewarding to the dog, a good boy could be enough if he doesn’t want food or a toy.


AGAIN, this comes from the handler, NOT from the dog's actions. And again, few dogs in shutdown are going to be interested in this praise. 



Steve Strom said:


> I think you can accomplish confidence building, clear obedience training that will teach the dog engaging with you at anything


The dog was engaging with the handler until the correction became too much for him. 



Steve Strom said:


> anywhere is a comfort zone without the ecollar. I don’t think you can do that with just the ecollar alone.


Thanks for your opinion. But I've done it repeatedly. 



Steve Strom said:


> I didn’t want to discuss your testimonials because I don’t think it would be fair to do on a forum.


I don’t see why not. 



Steve Strom said:


> My first thought was, these are people that even though they may have tried many other things they were never consistant enough.


Perhaps, but here you're just guessing. In the case of Roma her owner tried with the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) for about *two years *before going to the pinch collar. How long do you think she should have kept trying? Isn't two years of these methods enough to be considered "consistent?" Keep in mind that this was not a beginner to those methods. This owner had trained a certified SAR dog with at least one find under her belt with them. 



Steve Strom said:


> The dog benefited from clear obedience, but not because of the ecollar.


The dog did benefit from clear OB but that had nothing to do with stopping the 4F's response (Fight, Flight, Freeze, or Fool Around). My theory on this is on my site,


> My theory on why this method works to give dogs confidence is that the dog is forced by an unseen force, the Ecollar, to stay in one place. The penalty for going into fight or flight as Roma was doing, is the discomfort of the stimulation. Please note that I'm still working at the level where the dog first feels the stimulation. The dog wants to avoid that penalty and as such, holds her position. A child rides by on a bike and where the dog used to chase and try to bite that child, she is forced to hold her sit. *She *is doing the work. She is not being restrained by a leash. Lo and behold, nothing bad happens to the dog.
> 
> A few minutes later some children playing nearby start screaming and laughing. Roma used to run in abject terror when this occurred, but now the consequences of a stimulation make her do the work and she holds her position. Again, nothing bad happens to the dog.
> 
> ...


This has nothing to do with the dog learning OB as you mentioned. I think it has everything to do with the dog having a new perception of the world around her. It used to be that she achieved the drive satisfaction of survival by fleeing or fighting. But now, because some _Unseen Force _ (the Ecollar) made her hold her ground while the things that she used to run from or attack went on around her. You don't get these "unseen forces" with leashes, treats, toys and praise. 

This change happened to Roma in TWO DAYS. Heck in 25 minutes she went from trying to bite me on the face to licking my face. BTW this was going to be a VERY serious bite. This is not just a _"get away from me"_ nip. It was an _"I have to kill you to survive!"_ bite).


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Once again...I'm typing from my phone which leaves me a Mite limited...my apologies.

I'm real sorry to jump back in and get into the theory side of this...but please bear with my as I'm a little confused.

You say here how using the lowest level of stim is going to produce something that feels like a slight discomfort. Except when I plinked Ruby it was at the lowest setting of the collar.

What I'm confused about is how you plinking her at the lowest level of stim is going to produce a reaction different then the puddle-of-goo-under-PT-cruiser reaction that my plinking her at the lowest level of stim produced. 

Thanks for taking the time to help me understand!

-Cate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

> Thanks for the detailed description of why you think that this will not work on this dog. As I've said, you (and some others) are talking are theory (and now philosophy too) and I've done it quite a few times. I've done it with dogs that have shutdown due to being overcorrected and I've done it with dogs that are fear–aggressive.
> 
> If I was working at any stim level other than where the dog first feels the stim I might agree with the philosophy that says not to correct until the dog understands the behavior. But we're talking of the level of discomfort that a dog probably gets from a single flea bite. This is certainly LESS discomfort that he gets from any leash correction. This is probably a "fairness issue" with many people and perhaps you as well. You are welcome to your philosophy but realize that's all it is.


But in your own words Lou, you're theorizing. My impression is that yours is a philosophy of force overcomes all, but its not really force. Which I'm not taking a fairness issue with it, just still doubtful of its use on a fearful dog.



> I doubt that you were using the Ecollar at the level that I was using Steve. If you were, more than likely your dog would not even consider it to be a _"correction."_ He'd just think that he was bitten by a flea and might scratch his neck. More than likely you were quite a bit up the scale and causing quite a bit do discomfort, perhaps even to the pain level. If you disagree, please tell us how you found the level of stim that you were using and what brand/model of Ecollar you were using.


It's a tritronics sport50. The settings are 1/2 to 5. I had it on 2. Like I said, it's enough to slow him down and make him wonder what happened, but not enough to make him spit the dumbell or stop coming. I still had to intercept him and take him back around and over. But the results were good.



> I've just revised the site. It used to say (as you quoted) that the dog is _"going to *run *right past you."_ That may have you thinking that the dog _is afraid _of the hot ground and that he's running from it. Instead of this thought, picture a dog lying in the sun who decides that it's too hot. He doesn't get up and *run to the shade. *Rather he *ambles *at a walking pace, often well below a walking place, to it.
> 
> In any case, the site now says that the dog is _"going to *walk *right past you at about the same speed that he was moving in response to the leash pull."_ That is a more accurate description of the situation. Lest you think that I'm _"cheating"_ on this note that just above the statement that you cited it says this, _"As soon as he starts *to walk *towards you, that is, he takes 4–5 steps *in response to the pulling pressure of the Flexi …" *_[Emphasis added] No one can pull, with one hand, a dog into a running speed. ]


Yeah. Ok.



> That's true and if we were teaching the recall that might be a good way to start it. but we're not just teaching the recall. We're doing the first step of rehabilitating a dog that's in shut down. Merely rewarding him for responding to a leash pull won't do anything towards that end. And, in fact, this dog probably would not be interested in a treat, toy or praise at all! Dog in shutdown rarely are interested in such things. I've seen dogs in shutdown that simply stay laying down on the ground (as was the situation with this dog). They don't respond to the leash pull by getting up and moving. Instead they wind up being dragged across the ground. It was a leash pop that put the dog into that situation. He's liable to think that the leash pull (alone – without the stim) is more of the same! But with the introduction of the stim he now has a reason to move and because the stim has been added, it's significantly different to him; a whole new context.
> 
> In your scenario both of these acts, the leash pulling and the reward come from the handler. The dog knows exactly what caused it. That's not the case with the Ecollar stim. At first the dog thinks that it came from the ground. Sometimes they think it's a bug biting them. But either way, it DID NOT come from the handler. And that's going to be important just a little bit later when teaching the sit.


I feel like your bouncing back and forth from a fearful dog and a dog that shut down from too harsh or unfair corrections causing confusion. If I was, I didnt mean to. From the time you posted the video of the fearful dog, thats what I meant to address. With the fearful dog, I think encouragement to move is better then a stim and I like the dog knowing that its coming from me.



> The dog was engaging with the handler until the correction became too much for him.


Again, sorry if I wasnt clear about what I was addressing. I'm talking about a dog like in the video.



> Perhaps, but here you're just guessing. In the case of Roma her owner tried with the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) for about *two years *before going to the pinch collar. How long do you think she should have kept trying? Isn't two years of these methods enough to be considered "consistent?" Keep in mind that this was not a beginner to those methods. This owner had trained a certified SAR dog with at least one find under her belt with them.


Ok, but in all venues peoples training abilities vary. Someone could be very successful with one dog and struggle with the next one.



> This has nothing to do with the dog learning OB as you mentioned. I think it has everything to do with the dog having a new perception of the world around her. It used to be that she achieved the drive satisfaction of survival by fleeing or fighting. But now, because some _Unseen Force _(the Ecollar) made her hold her ground while the things that she used to run from or attack went on around her. You don't get these "unseen forces" with leashes, treats, toys and praise.
> 
> This change happened to Roma in TWO DAYS. Heck in 25 minutes she went from trying to bite me on the face to licking my face. BTW this was going to be a VERY serious bite. This is not just a _"get away from me"_ nip. It was an _"I have to kill you to survive!"_ bite).


Ok, now we've come back to your theorizing. You can watch Victoria Stilwell Rehab dogs on tv using completely different techniques. She has a lot of studies and scientific this and that making her points too. At the end of every show the dogs better. 

I've seen your glowing testimonials, a video of a little terrier standing around and a video of someone else's training. I know I'm pretty skeptical, but there's a little too much take my word for it for me.


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Before I comment, I will admit that I am friend of Lou's. That doesn't mean I always agree with him either. I can assure you that he isn't making anything up when it comes to fixing a fear issue with an eCollar. I have done the same. One of the dogs that I did it with was a problem child dog from a rescue. She was a very fearful Pit mix. I used an eCollar on her from day. I saw a massive change in the first session. She likes everyone now. I even let her be pet by very young children.

My experience was very similar to this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl-6T1fk3Os

I think one has to realize that many things in dog training will defy logic and theory. When you come across something that works, repeatedly, why try to find reasons that it isn't possible. Seeing should be believing. 

Many would rather argue than go out and actually train dogs. 

Victoria Stilwell was mentioned. She is a horrible trainer in that some of the things she does will make a dominant or an aggressive dog worse. Training with reward only is not balanced. Adherence to some Pure Positive rule book will lead to one only ever having limited results. Yes, you might have spectacular results if you just train a couple dogs. Train a couple dozen with this mindset and I can assure you will have more than your fair share of failures.

Instead of people saying that someone else's methods are impossible; why not try to find out what they are doing?

Someone also mentioned that the lowest levels of their eCollar were too hot for this style of training. If you go out and buy a Dogtra you wont have this problem. A Dogtra can be set that you can barely perceive it or don't even feel it at all.


----------



## Steve Pinder (Feb 5, 2010)

Geoff Empey said:


> I read this link today and found it quite interesting and timely for your friends Doberman.
> 
> The title is ... When it all goes wrong .. how to respond to failure. It's a great read.
> 
> http://www.clickertraining.com/node/2465?source=fbfp


i read this, looks really nice ,
thanks for posting this link


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Daniel Audet said:


> Before I comment, I will admit that I am friend of Lou's. .


Welcome Daniel. We won't hold that against you, but please take the opportunity to stop by the introduction thread and tell us a little about yourself. Then you can get back to your Dogtra advertisement, I mean e-collar discussion. 

Just pokin' fun about the Lou comment.

DFrost


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> You say here how using the lowest level of stim is going to produce something that feels like a slight discomfort. Except when I plinked Ruby it was at the lowest setting of the collar.


What brand and model of Ecollar were you using? 



Cate Helfgott said:


> What I'm confused about is how you plinking her at the lowest level of stim is going to produce a reaction different then the puddle-of-goo-under-PT-cruiser reaction that my plinking her *at the lowest level of stim produced. * [Emphasis added]


Two comments. One is that I'm NOT saying that I was using the lowest level of stim _"that the Ecollar produced."_ I'm using the lowest level of stim that the dog can feel. *Those are NOT the same thing. * In fact, with most models and brands of Ecollar you can't find the lowest level of stim that the dog can perceive. You can only find the lowest setting *of that Ecollar *that the dog can first perceive. Note the difference. 

Most brands of Ecollar have 6–15 settings. Only one brand, Dogtra has 127 levels. Let's assume that you're using a collar that has 15 settings. For all practical purposes the highest level that Ecollars have is about the same across all the brands. That means that on your Ecollar each change in level is going to be about a 7% jump from the previous level. With the Dogtra it's going to be about a 0.8% jump. Having so many levels allows you go to the level that the dog first feels with much more precision. With a collar that has only 15 levels you can only approximate it, unless you're extremely lucky. Even the lowest setting that such a collar has gives you 7% of the collar's power at the lowest setting. The Dogtra gives you 0,8% of the power that the collar has, MUCH lower than then collar with 15 levels. 

When you used the lowest setting you your 15 level Ecollar it was 7% of the power available, way too high for your dog. and so she hid under the car. If you were using a collar that had only 6 settings it was 17% of the total power available! EVEN HIGHER. The tool that you use for my method is very important. For best results the Dogtras are much better because they let you go much lower and find the dog's level with much more precision. 

Second, in all the dogs that I've worked I've never had even the most sensitive of them do anything more overt than look at the ground, scratch as if they'd been bitten by a flea or just get up and move to another spot. Sometimes it's an ear flick or just a blink! I'd guess that your Ecollar did not go low enough to allow you to use the lowest level of stim that your dog could perceive. 

If you're just using the Ecollar for corrections, punishing the dog for non compliance, this is not very important. You only need to exceed the dog's threshold of discomfort and being able to do that does not need great precision; an approximation is plenty good enough. I've never come across anyone who's measured the strength of their corrections, sometimes they're given as hard as the trainer can pop! The strength of them is not precisely repeatable except by the most skilled of trainers. 



Cate Helfgott said:


> Thanks for taking the time to help me understand!


My pleasure Cate. It helps me to explain it better to others.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> But in your own words Lou, you're theorizing.


I'm theorizing as to why it works Steve. But the fact that it works is not a theory. I've done it numerous times and so have people who have used my methods for this. 



Steve Strom said:


> My impression is that yours is a philosophy of force overcomes all, but its not really force.


I'd suggest that you read my post again. Its should be clear that force is only used to teach the recall and the sit but it has little to do with rehabbing the dog directly. That comes about *IN*directly as a result of the dog's observations that nothing bad happen to her when she held her ground in the face of situations that used to put her into fight to flight. Force most certainly does NOT over come all. 



Steve Strom said:


> Which I'm not taking a fairness issue with it, just still doubtful of its use on a fearful dog.


Steve you can doubt it all you want. Both Roma's story and Simon's story are verifiable. 

Earlier I wrote,


> …please tell us how you found the level of stim that you were using and what brand/model of Ecollar you were using.





Steve Strom said:


> It's a tritronics sport50. The settings are 1/2 to 5. I had it on 2.


I figured that you were not using a Dogtra collar Steve and here is the problem. Your collar has only six levels of stim. Each step up is about a 17% jump. You're set on a two which is just under half of the power of your collar. On the Dogtra that would be at about setting of about 64. Of course no one can predict at what level a dog will first feel a stim but the average dog first feels the stim at about a 20-30, (16% – 24% of the full power of the collar) nowhere near the setting on your collar that you used. 

This is not a big deal if you're just using the tool to correct misbehavior or otherwise punish a dog, but IT IS if you're using it to teach with. Your Ecollar is not even suitable to use with my methods, it's not adjustable low enough and the jumps between settings are too large. 

One of the problems in communications here is that you have an entirely different picture of what I think of when I say _"Ecollar'_ and that different picture is leading you astray. Your mind also seems to be closed as you are just repeating over and over again that you don't think it will work, when I've done it. I don't understand that thought process unless you are just saying that you don't believe me. 

Lots of people think a thing can't be done until someone does it. But when that happens MOST people will admit that they were wrong. Either you're not in that group or you just don't believe me. As always I'm happy to supply references. Ask in PM's if you're interested. 



Steve Strom said:


> I feel like your bouncing back and forth from a fearful dog and a dog that shut down from too harsh or unfair corrections causing confusion.


I’m not. I think the dog is fearful because the correction was too much for him. As a result he shutdown. The dog that was described in the OP in this thread is just showing an extreme level of fearfulness. You think he's confused. But I've never seen a dog shut down from confusion. They just keep trying. Shutdown is the equivalent of _learned helplessness _where a dog refuses to move because he's learned that no matter what he does, everything hurts. Those dogs are rarely confused, they've just given up and have stopped trying to escape the discomfort. 



Steve Strom said:


> If I was, I didnt mean to. From the time you posted the video of the fearful dog, thats what I meant to address.


I'm not. That was just an example of a dog that responded to fear with aggression. He didn't respond with flight and he didn't respond with shutdown. But the dog's response is not what I'm talking about here. It makes no difference if it's any of the 4 F's. the problem is fear that comes from some lack of confidence and my method of using the Ecollar to teach the recall and the sit builds that confidence. 



Steve Strom said:


> With the fearful dog, I think encouragement to move is better then a stim and I like the dog knowing that its coming from me.


The stim IS an encouragement to move. A dog lying in the sun who gets too hot, who gets up and moves, has been _encouraged _by his discomfort to move. This isn't force. It's just a dog escaping discomfort. The dog feeling the stim learns to escape the discomfort by moving towards the handler. He's shown this by pulling him in and then releasing the button. Similarly he learns to escape the discomfort by putting his butt on the ground when given a sit command. 

Earlier I wrote,


> Perhaps, but here you're just guessing. In the case of Roma her owner tried with the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) for about *two years *before going to the pinch collar. How long do you think she should have kept trying? Isn't two years of these methods enough to be considered "consistent?" Keep in mind that this was not a beginner to those methods. This owner had trained a certified SAR dog with at least one find under her belt with them.





Steve Strom said:


> Ok, but in all venues peoples training abilities vary. Someone could be very successful with one dog and struggle with the next one.


The venue with Roma was the same. Same owner and same method that she'd been successfully using with her certified dog for about 2 1/2 years before Roma came along. She was in vet school, working on a PhD in neurobiology so she was well acquainted with and practiced in the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig). Some might have even called her an _expert _in them. Yet they had little effect on Roma's fear and aggression. 


Some if what I said was theorizing Steve; but this was not,


> This change happened to Roma in TWO DAYS. Heck in 25 minutes she went from trying to bite me on the face to licking my face. BTW this was going to be a VERY serious bite.





Steve Strom said:


> You can watch Victoria Stilwell Rehab dogs on tv using completely different techniques. She has a lot of studies and scientific this and that making her points too. * At the end of every show the dogs better. * [Emphasis added]


Gonna have to strongly disagree with you on this Steve. I've watched many of her shows where the dogs made absolutely no progress. I think the worst one was the couple that had the two sheepdogs that continually dragged them around. As VS was promoting herself and telling us how wonderful was the result, in the background the two dogs were STILL dragging the owners around. 



Steve Strom said:


> I've seen your glowing testimonials, a video of a little terrier standing around and a video of someone else's training. *I know I'm pretty skeptical, but there's a little too much take my word for it for me. * [Emphasis added]


I think there are two way to read your last sentence. One is that I'm presenting _"a little too much [information]."_ The other is that I'm asking you to _"take my word for too much"_ [without supporting information]. 

You don't have to take my word for it Steve. Most of the people who have written those testimonials are willing to be contacted by doubters. Pick a couple of them, PM me for their contact information (I'll ask you to keep to yourself and rely on your word that you will) and I'll put you in touch with them.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Geoff Empey said:


> I read this link today and found it quite interesting and timely for your friends Doberman.
> 
> The title is ... When it all goes wrong .. how to respond to failure. It's a great read.
> 
> http://www.clickertraining.com/node/2465?source=fbfp


WOW! Not sure how I missed this post, but I did. Anytime I see the name _"Karen Pryor"_ I’m reminded of her complete failure with her own cat. The cat was peeing on the burners of her stove and should could not figure out that a crate or simply a closed kitchen door could handle the problem. She was unable to train the cat and so she had it killed! I guess it's OK to tell people _"Don't Shoot the Dog"_ (the title of her popular book) but it's perfectly OK to kill the cat! 

And when I see the name Steve White, I'm reminded of the fact that he tried to train the dogs of his police department with the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig), but was NEVER able to do so without reverting to correction work, with leash and collar. He also purposefully selected SOFT dogs so that they'd be more trainable with his methods. I don't think that soft dogs belong in LE work. He also the canine teeth of those dogs flat to minimize the injuries they caused when biting crooks.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thanks for jumping in Dan. Now Steve does not have to take "just my word" for this.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

David Frost said:


> Welcome Danieal. We won't hold that against you,


Sure, that's what you say now. lol



David Frost said:


> Then you can get back to your Dogtra advertisement, I mean e-collar discussion.


The fact is that my methods would not have been possible with any other brand or model of Ecollar. No other has stim levels as low and the precision adjustability of that brand. I'm told that Tri–Tronics had the opportunity to put this technology to use and declined. So the inventor went to Dogtra, the next most popular brand, and they jumped at it.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I have Dogtra, a couple of different models and a couple of Tri Tronics. They both do what I want them to do. I am just teasing about the advertisement gig.

DFrost


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

What if the dog doesnt comply Lou? The dog decides to stay in that sunny spot.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Hey Lou

I believe I was using a Dogtra 175NCP. One of the ladies in my complex had been using it on one of her dogs...she didnt like it and ended up letting it go to me for cheap.

~Cate


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Steve Strom said:


> What if the dog doesnt comply Lou? The dog decides to stay in that sunny spot.


Then the sun isn't bothering the dog very much. It is considered a non-aversive. 

I think you might be missing out on the way eCollars work with fearful dogs. We aren't giving corrections that the dog jumps out of their skin. 

We are using them at levels so low that it takes several seconds for it to even become a minor annoyance. The dog then figures out ...."geez when I'm close to this guy...I never get that annoying feeling...he must be a magically good guy!"

The other thing that eCollar does is DISTRACT the dog from its fear. Say you had a fear of spiders. You came across a spider and became fixated on it. Your buddy slaps you on the shoulder every few seconds and says...."yeah dont worry about it...its nothing!" The slapping on the shoulder momentarily takes your attention off of the spider, allowing you to be in front of the spider longer without your fear having a snowball effect.

Again ..this is putting things into human terms which I hate doing. I am trying to paint a picture that all of this stuff is certainly possible. 

Tell you want ...go volunteer for a rescue and I will give you instructions over the phone on what to do step by step. You MIGHT just save a fear biters life.

--Dan


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Daniel Audet said:


> Then the sun isn't bothering the dog very much. It is considered a non-aversive.
> 
> 
> 
> --Dan


So what do you do? Your working at the level the dog first feels it already, right?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> What if the dog doesnt comply Lou? The dog decides to stay in that sunny spot.


Doesn't comply with what Steve? He's not been given a command. He's simply lying in the sun, becomes hot and moves. If he stays it was not aversive enough that he'd work to avoid it, by definition, not an aversive. 

Perhaps you mean "what if the shutdown dog in this thread did not comply with a command to move out of his shutdown position when I was working with him?" Well, this can't happen because at the start of the recall training no command is given. There's nothing to comply with. The stim is applied (after finding the level that he first perceives) and he's pulled towards the trainer. When he takes a few steps in response to that pull, the stim is stopped.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> I believe I was using a Dogtra 175NCP. One of the ladies in my complex had been using it on one of her dogs...she didnt like it and ended up letting it go to me for cheap.
> 
> ~Cate


How did you determine what level of stim to use?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> So what do you do? Your working at the level the dog first feels it already, right?


Steve the dog lying in the sun has nothing to do with the discussion. It was used to show that dogs will avoid things they find aversive and that force has nothing to do with it. 

Do you consider that the sun, that is responsible for the dog feeling too warm and uncomfortable, is applying force?


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Steve do you now believe that a fear issue can be fixed with an eCollar?

--Dan


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Lou Castle said:


> Steve the dog lying in the sun has nothing to do with the discussion. It was used to show that dogs will avoid things they find aversive and that force has nothing to do with it.
> 
> Do you consider that the sun, that is responsible for the dog feeling too warm and uncomfortable, is applying force?


Ok, Ha Ha. Let me clarify. In your recall article it says you've already found your dogs working level. You hit continuous, pull, and he won't move. What's next?


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Daniel Audet said:


> Steve do you now believe that a fear issue can be fixed with an eCollar?
> 
> --Dan


No. Sorry. Not even from Mr. Bergen himself.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Lou Castle said:


> How did you determine what level of stim to use?


If I recall I set it at level two or three...I do recall it being very low on the scale of stimulation though....I have a bit of a confession to make that goes with why I chose that. Before I was a show-dog person I was a pet dog person, and I worked as an assistant trainer in a purely positive methods training organization. I was very hesitant when it came to _any_ kind of negative reinforcement back then...so I was generally a bit of a chicken shit when it came to the strength of the kind of corrections I used.

No real science to the choice...just fear of doing something too strong to the dog....which I did anyway :-/

~Cate


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Steve Strom said:


> No. Sorry. Not even from Mr. Bergen himself.


Ok, so do you think the video that I posted is a lie? Do you think Lou and I are also lying?

--Dan


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

No.I never said anything like that.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Daniel Audet said:


> Ok, so do you think the video that I posted is a lie? Do you think Lou and I are also lying?
> 
> --Dan


Once is not a pattern. I have no doubt there are many techniques, with and or without electronics that work on some dogs. There are also some techniques that won't work on some dogs. I've trained a few dogs over a few years and I still have not found the single technique that works in all situations. Well except for teaching stay with a .357.

dFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou wrote:

Here's a comment from someone else who shall be unnamed,
Quote:
Dobermanns are highly intelligent and don't respond well to the typical cookie cutter GSD Schutzhund training.

Dobermanns are also handler sensitive and don't respond well to corrections when they don't understand the exercise they are being corrected for OR think the correction is unfair …

shutting down...stop the corrections! Start building a relationship based on operant conditioning. Forget about e-collars in this application.

The first several comments are generalizations that are often not true and really have nothing to do with the topic. Then comes the advice. Nowhere is there a clue that this is someone's opinion.


>Lou,

>I did a cut and paste, since this was part of one of your
>quotes within quotes within quotes posts that was too 
>friggen hard to follow 
>IF you want to quote something I wrote AND add your
>comments. Then have the courtesy to attribute the posts
>properly. Try to avoid this passive aggressive nonsense.

>My statements were NOT generalizations. They were based
>on hands on experience with two HOT Dobermanns.
>The original topic was a DOBERMANN shutting down under
>corrections. NOTHING to do with e-collars or recalls/sits.
>You are the one that has taken the Original subject off
>topic.

>There have been LOTS of claims made, even videos posted
>(of other peoples work?) to prove them. You've even
>called in reinforcements that agree with you.
>Cate even offered a meal and a place to stay, but you were
>not going to be in her neighborhood. Heck Lou I'll meet 
>you in Gunnison at SARCON in July. You don't have to go
>anywhere. I'll bring my Dobermann and/or Dutch Shepherd
>taught with my method/style. You can can bring any one of
>the three thousand dogs you have trained with your system
>or protocol and test/compare them. A basic OB pattern, 
>retrieves, recall speed? Anything you're up for and we can
>video tape it
>What do you say?


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> Ok, Ha Ha. Let me clarify. In your recall article it says you've already found your dogs working level. You hit continuous, pull, and he won't move. What's next?


It says in the article on the recall,


> How hard do you pull? About as hard as you’d push on a baby carriage to get and keep it moving. (Sometimes that just takes one finger and sometimes it takes both hands, such as when going up a hill). You want to pull just hard enough to get the dog to move.


This is not a _"give a slight tug"_ situation. You pull hard enough so that the dog moves.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> If I recall I set it at level two or three...I do recall it being very low on the scale of stimulation though....I have a bit of a confession to make that goes with why I chose that. Before I was a show-dog person I was a pet dog person, and I worked as an assistant trainer in a purely positive methods training organization. I was very hesitant when it came to _any_ kind of negative reinforcement back then...so I was generally a bit of a chicken shit when it came to the strength of the kind of corrections I used.
> 
> No real science to the choice...just fear of doing something too strong to the dog....which I did anyway


I've written an entire article devoted to JUST fitting the Ecollar to the dog and finding his working level. Even with your inability to learn from reading, I doubt that you'd have done this had you read my article. 

Instead of using the Ecollar to find you dog's working level you just guessed at the setting. Not to make you feel bad but doing this is one thing that's responsible for the bad rap that Ecollars get. 

There was also a problem with some Ecollars in the Dogtra line several years ago, the low to medium power models. It's been fixed now and if you still have the collar Dogtra will fix it free of charge if you send it to them and ask for the _"Special Lou Castle Fix."_ (yes, really). You can also fix it yourself with an article I can send that involves a shopping list (compelte with part numbers) and a trip to Radio shack. There are pictures that show you just what to do. It's easy and even the electrically challenged (I'm in that group) can do it. 

Basically it involved dogs that were exceptionally sensitive to Estim (not to be confused with softness, handler or correction sensitivity or any other kind of sensitivity) who felt what was termed _"a charging pulse"_ that was higher than the setting of the collar. IOW at low levels that the Ecollar was set on, it was actually giving a stim of about a 15.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Steve Strom said:


> No.I never said anything like that.


There's a rumor (mostly dead now) that bees can't fly because it violated the laws of physics. But no one told the bees, and they didn't study these laws, so they just kept on flying. 

And so those of us who know that it can be done, will just keep doing it. And we'll keep telling those with open minds, how to do it. 

The first bit of work with Roma was done in front of a group of doubting SAR team members. They too thought that it could not be done. I changed their minds. Later I did a seminar for them. A little while later all the team members were using Ecollars. All but one that is. All of them had excellent recalls and good control. All but one of them.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

David Frost said:


> Once is not a pattern.


Very true. I've done this with several dogs. Dan has done it once and the video shows the work of another trainer doing it. There are some testimonials on my website about it too. *THAT'S * _"a pattern."_ 



David Frost said:


> I have no doubt there are many techniques, with and or without electronics that work on some dogs. There are also some techniques that won't work on some dogs. I've trained a few dogs over a few years and I still have not found the single technique that works in all situations.


I've not found this either. This is _a combination of several techniques _that has yet to fail for me. As I said, _ "I’m sure that somewhere there's a dog out there that my methods won't work well with. But in over 3,000 dogs I've not come across him."_


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Lou,
> 
> I did a cut and paste, since this was part of one of your quotes within quotes within quotes posts that was too friggen hard to follow


Some managed. I understand if you did not. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> IF you want to quote something I wrote AND add your comments. Then have the courtesy to attribute the posts properly.


I was hoping to avoid another of your rude personal attacks Thomas. I can see that this was a waste of time. Even after a banning, your first post back in the thread continues them. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Try to avoid this passive aggressive nonsense.


Thanks for the long distance diagnosis. LOL. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> My statements were NOT generalizations. They were based on hands on experience with two HOT Dobermanns.


Well you say that you trained the dogs but it's far from proven. Already been covered though. No need to do it again. 

In any case, your experience with TWO *(WOW! TWO?) * dogs is hardly indicative of the entire breed. I've had more than that brought to my seminars. SOME of there were _"highly intelligent"_ and some were not. As to _"cookie cutter GSD SchH training"_ your comment really makes no sense, especially since I don't do SchH training. NONE of the Dobies that I worked were particularly _"handler sensitive"_ as your GENERALIZED statement said. And finally NO DOG _"responds well to corrections when they don't understand the exercise … or think that the correction is unfair …"_ 



Thomas Barriano said:


> The original topic was a DOBERMANN shutting down under corrections. NOTHING to do with e-collars or recalls/sits.


Yes I know. Teaching the recall and the sit with the Ecollar is my method of fixing the problem. You STILL don't get this. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> You are the one that has taken the Original subject off topic.


Wrong again Thomas. After the OP described the situation he asked,


> So my question is *anyone has experience with this and how can we get pass this hurdle with this dog * (besides throwing it away)? Should we just go back to the basics and work on obedience using positive methods and use no compulsions? What about the mistakes the dog made? How to correct with no compulsion? *Looking forward to any advise...thanks. * [Emphasis added]


I have experience with this and let's all note that Sonny Lee DID NOT SAY, _"Looking forward to any advice that Thomas agrees with."_ 



Thomas Barriano said:


> There have been LOTS of claims made, even videos posted (of other peoples work?) to prove them. You've even called in reinforcements that agree with you.


Yes and? ROFL. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Cate even offered a meal and a place to stay, but you were not going to be in her neighborhood.
> 
> Cate lives in VA and I live in CA. There's about 2,600 miles between us. I'm sure that most will forgive me for not driving/flying that distance to show her something in exchange for a meal and a place to stay. Oh the absurdity! LOL.
> 
> ...


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Steve Strom said:


> No.I never said anything like that.


Well if we aren't lying it might possibly be true.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

I will just say from reading this discussion and many many very very similar internet discussions involving Lou , that at least for me I get it Lou , I get it . 

YOU have been able to train dogs with similar problems with the ecollar and never failed . I GET IT ! 

With that said , I agree with others that I don't think it's a technique for every dog . I GET IT THOUGH . You've had success with it with many dogs , never failed and because of it recommend it for others due to your success . 

I think your articles are the best I've seen on the internet involving the use of ecollars and recommend them to anyone interested in learning how to use one . 

BUT my god talk about beating a dead horse !


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Steve Strom said:


> No. Sorry. Not even from Mr. Bergen himself.


Here you are implying that I am Lou's dummy. How dare you ! I guess this forum allows cheap shot artists. Remember you drew first blood ! Please make a bookmark of this so you will know why parts of your anatomy will be sore in the future. 

--Dan


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Daniel Audet said:


> Before I comment, I will admit that I am friend of Lou's. That doesn't mean I always agree with him either. I can assure you that he isn't making anything up when it comes to fixing a fear issue with an eCollar. I have done the same. One of the dogs that I did it with was a problem child dog from a rescue. She was a very fearful Pit mix. I used an eCollar on her from day. I saw a massive change in the first session. She likes everyone now. I even let her be pet by very young children.
> 
> My experience was very similar to this video.
> 
> ...





> Once is not a pattern. I have no doubt there are many techniques, with and or without electronics that work on some dogs. There are also some techniques that won't work on some dogs. I've trained a few dogs over a few years and I still have not found the single technique that works in all situations. Well except for teaching stay with a .357.
> 
> dFrost


Where did I say it will work on every dog? I said," *I have done the same." *

I will be the first to agree that there is no technique that will work on every dog. I have commented on other forums for people to put the eCollar in the drawer and work with another technique for awhile. Just because I said something can work, why refute what I am saying? I will assure you of one thing though, a .357 will never be part of my dog training tools. Maybe thats what some of the Pure Positive folks do when things fail with their treat tossing.


----------



## Cate Helfgott (Feb 16, 2009)

Hey Lou! 

Thanks for the response! Wow...how horrifying if I'd actually plinked her at 15 rather then 2! Holy cow!! But in that case I guess it wouldn't have mattered whose method I used, how I fitted the collar or what brand I belted on...holy cow, what a no win situation! I was right before!! Much better that I had not used the e-collar in the first place!!

-Cate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Lou , I like your buddy you invited here . Very entertaining .


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Mr. Audet, first off, I've trained a few dogs in my day. In fact I'm still training them. My .357 comment was in humor. sorry that you missed it. My comment of "one not being a pattern" meant exactly that. I was commenting on the question of whether or not you were being called a liar. No one said, nor did they infer any such thing. Just because experiences differ, does not mean one or the other is not telling the truth. I use e-collars. Since as you know police training is results specific rather than measured by verbage, my results with e-collars indicate I use them effectively. The fact that I don't use them like you does not make me any more right or wrong. I wouldn't be using an e-collar on the problem posed by the OP anyway. I don't deal with pets. If a dog I had in training exhibited that behavior, it would not be in training. My background is police dogs. It's all I do. I'm not in business. I don't sell products nor do I sell training. I'm employed by a department and manage a 45 dog canine unit. I'd really like to keep this discussion one of different techniques rather than see it continue a slide to who's right. 

DFrost


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> As I said, _ "I’m sure that somewhere there's a dog out there that my methods won't work well with. But in over 3,000 dogs I've not come across him."_


Lou, I too have trained well over 3,000 dogs in my career. It happens to us old dogs, the numbers climb. I admit, 13 years as an instructor at the dog school at Lackland helped that number climb. At any rate, like you, I've not found that one method or techique that works on all dogs, all the time. 

DFrost


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

David Frost said:


> Mr. Audet, first off, I've trained a few dogs in my day. In fact I'm still training them. My .357 comment was in humor. sorry that you missed it. My comment of "one not being a pattern" meant exactly that. I was commenting on the question of whether or not you were being called a liar. No one said, nor did they infer any such thing. Just because experiences differ, does not mean one or the other is not telling the truth. I use e-collars. Since as you know police training is results specific rather than measured by verbage, my results with e-collars indicate I use them effectively. The fact that I don't use them like you does not make me any more right or wrong. I wouldn't be using an e-collar on the problem posed by the OP anyway. I don't deal with pets. If a dog I had in training exhibited that behavior, it would not be in training. My background is police dogs. It's all I do. I'm not in business. I don't sell products nor do I sell training. I'm employed by a department and manage a 45 dog canine unit. I'd really like to keep this discussion one of different techniques rather than see it continue a slide to who's right.
> 
> DFrost


I was merely commenting on the statement that I never implied that it would work on every dog. 

My comments involving the treat tossing to fix aggression, that isn't you is it? So I am sorry if you took it as such.

I also have no knowledge of your abilities or experience. I was in defensive mode after being sucker punched. (not you)

This discussion wouldn't have taken such a downward spiral if someone(not you again) hadn't called me a dummy.

--Dan


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Daniel Audet said:


> I was merely commenting on the statement that I never implied that it would work on every dog.
> 
> My comments involving the treat tossing to fix aggression, that isn't you is it? So I am sorry if you took it as such.
> 
> ...


I encourage some aggression. Actually, I put the young Troopers in the suit and let them encourage. (another weak attempt at humor) No sir, I don't throw treats at unwarranted/unwanted aggression.

I wouldn't expect you to have knowledge of my abilities or experiences. I would venture a guess that the majority of posters on this forum have little actual knowledge of other posters abilities and experience. Like many of the posters, I comment on posts that interest me and offer my opinion, based on my training and experiences. It's also been my experience those without abilities and experience usually 
get shown up pretty quickly.

At any rate, I've found it's good not to be too thin skinned. While there may well have been some inferences, no one called you anything.

DFrost


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Daniel Audet said:


> Here you are implying that I am Lou's dummy. How dare you ! I guess this forum allows cheap shot artists. Remember you drew first blood ! Please make a bookmark of this so you will know why parts of your anatomy will be sore in the future.
> 
> --Dan


Yeah. Your right Dan. My head hurts now. I'll just ignore you from now on so I won't be tempted to have any more fun at your expense.


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

David Frost said:


> At any rate, I've found it's good not to be too thin skinned. While there may well have been some inferences, no one called you anything.
> DFrost


OK, would you agree implied?

A serious question now...

Do you believe that some / many fearful dogs could be possibly helped with the aid of an eCollar? (an attempt to be back on topic) If you think very few could be, why do you believe so? (just a question) I am looking for an honest answer with joking put aside temporarily.

--Dan


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> snip
> I was hoping to avoid another of your rude personal attacks Thomas. I can see that this was a waste of time. Even after a banning, your first post back in the thread continues them.
> 
> >Your comments are "searches for truth" and anything
> ...


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Daniel Audet said:


> Do you believe that some / many fearful dogs could be possibly helped with the aid of an eCollar? (an attempt to be back on topic) If you think very few could be, why do you believe so? (just a question) I am looking for an honest answer with joking put aside temporarily.
> 
> --Dan


I believe few fearful dog would be helped by the use of an e-collar because few handlers are experienced with them.
Written instructions. no matter how well written, are subject to miss interpretation and hands on in person instruction is the most effective training method.

As a aside. I disagree with your conclusion that the Dobermann that is being discussed is "fearfull" As I stated
in my first response. I believe the dog is "shutting down" to correction because it is confused about what the handler wants and/or it feels the correction is unfair. Again the solution for confusion is NOT e-collar stimulation. The solution is building a better bond with the dog


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Daniel Audet said:


> Do you believe that some / many fearful dogs could be possibly helped with the aid of an eCollar? (an attempt to be back on topic) If you think very few could be, why do you believe so? (just a question) I am looking for an honest answer with joking put aside temporarily.
> 
> --Dan


I see where it has worked on many dogs. I have no reason to not believe Lou. I can also see pitfalls with some dogs. As I've said previously, I don't think there is any single technique that works on all dogs. Like I said though, I would never be using such techniques. For me, since I can select the dogs I work with, it's a moot point. I choose not to work with that type of dog. A fearful dog would not be in my program. 
That's about as humorless as I can make it. 
DFrost


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

David Frost said:


> I see where it has worked on many dogs. I have no reason to not believe Lou. I can also see pitfalls with some dogs. As I've said previously, I don't think there is any single technique that works on all dogs. Like I said though, I would never be using such techniques. For me, since I can select the dogs I work with, it's a moot point. I choose not to work with that type of dog. A fearful dog would not be in my program.
> That's about as humorless as I can make it.
> DFrost


Why has anyone come to the conclusion that we're talking about a fearful dog? There is a BIG difference between a dog "shutting down" and just not doing anything because they're confused (like I stated in my initial reply) and a fearful dog. Why are people posting videos of shelter dogs
cowering in the back of a kennel and thinking this has anything to do with the Dobermann in the original post?

There are dozens of e-collar trainers who volunteer in
shelters and get positive results and save a lot of animals
from euthanasia. That's NOT what the original post was talking about. The OP was about a Dobermann who shut down after being corrected by his OWNER, not a shelter dog
afraid of everyone


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

OK... a bit of clarification. I was only commenting on an eCollar being able to help SOME fearful dogs. I can't say MOST or ALL. They are both words that I try / should to avoid with dog training. 

A dog that is shutting down on an eCollar is most likely confused. I would highly suspect that someone has gone overboard with the level of corrections they are using if they dog is truly shut down. They also possibly / more than likely didn't do the initial training properly. If the dog is confused and being corrected at high levels, yeah this is possible. I personally have not ever had this happen. Fast and Good rarely occur in the same sentence. 

I've trained dozens of dogs on eCollars. I have yet to have one shutdown. Most dogs that I use eCollars on, jump for joy when they see the eCollar because they understand that it is time for them to be able to go offleash. This is a world that would not be possible (safely) without the use of the eCollar. 

I don't know if all of this is relevant to the discussion or not. I just wanted to make my position clear. I didn't come to this forum to back Lou up or come here to engage in name calling. I came here because it was a subject that interested me. Please be assured that I don't ever JUST agree with anyone because they are a friend. I hope SOME respect me for that.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

This is not a _"give a slight tug"_ situation. You pull hard enough so that the dog moves.
That makes my point Lou. That significantly reduces the role of the ecollar. I would say from what I’ve observed, makes it insignificant. But just going by Robin’s video that points to it as only one part with no mention of the actual importance of it and the fact that you rely on the line, not higher stim, I find it to be unnesessary for this.

The technique of following, rewarding, encouraging, and re-assuring with a touch will all work without the ecollar, you can witness it at group obedience classes that have a fair amount of dogs exactly like Marley. Just like with the ecollar, the results will be dependent on the skill of the person.

What you won’t see is anyone of any skill level using an ecollar alone, no other tools, to accomplish this trust and confidence building because even in your method Lou, the use of a tool that sends a dog running past you (that was your long standing, un-edited wording) defines confusion and as has been pointed out, that’s counter to learning.

My point is the ecollar is a good tool, but not the nessesary part of any of this work and with your descriptions of it being so innocuous that its no more discomfort then the aversion to the hot sun, that *imho* makes it nothing more then a poor substitute for my voice in teaching new behaviors or communicating anything to my dog.

When I first got my ecollar, I got it for a reason a lot of people do. I had a problem that I needed to stop. After putting the collar on without using it for a week or so, I went through the three-action introduction like the directions said. Like in the booklet and the video he already knew the commands so after finding his level which is a 1, like the terrier in your video, I went to work.

It got fast results so like a lot of other folks, I decided to look into the different uses for it. At the time I read your articles, some other articles, and the Dobbs website. Looked at videos, talked to different trainers and to people who had used one.

I read your stuff and saw that you said it was so much more then just a tool for corrections and was great for teaching new behaviors, ending the stim was a reward in itself. It didn’t read like anything I needed, and now that I’ve taken another look, it still doesn’t. *Imo* your method stops right where training begins and says, "That’s all folks". Like I said, so innocuous that it’s a poor substitute for my own voice. Even at your purely altruistic financial loss, the price of the collar would seem like a waste of money for myself. I guess 3000 people would disagree and so would Dogtra. In spite of what you’ve said, it does *imho *seem like good marketing and a way to expand your customer base.

What did and still does make sense to me is the use of it as a corrective device is where the real value of it is. So I’ll continue to use it *like most people *and I’ll try to figure out which things it will help me with and not bother with it where I don’t need it, but what I won’t do is bother to respond to you anymore Lou. Sometimes the way I phrase things are nothing more then an attempt at being respectful. All that does is give you more ammo to parse and roll on the floor laughing about. I know my sense of humor is grating to you, so I won’t kid around or take shots at you and the members of Team Castle.

Whatever keyboard viagra you’ve got working for you Lou, I can’t keep up. I’ll just put you and Daniel on ignore so that I’m not tempted to step out of my place and challenge your authoritative knowledge or experience. And in conclusion Lou, I’ll get my ice somewhere else. Thanks for your time.

This is all just my opinion. I don't expect any weight to be given any of it but since I was allowed one, I decided to express it.


----------



## Daniel Audet (Jun 8, 2009)

Steve Strom said:


> I know my sense of humor is grating to you, so I won’t kid around or take shots at you and the members of Team Castle.
> Whatever keyboard viagra you’ve got working for you Lou, I can’t keep up. I’ll just put you and Daniel on ignore so that I’m not tempted to step out of my place and challenge your authoritative knowledge or experience. And in conclusion Lou, I’ll get my ice somewhere else. Thanks for your time.
> 
> This is all just my opinion. I don't expect any weight to be given any of it but since I was allowed one, I decided to express it.


You are an ignorant ass. Please do me the favor of not replying to me. You obviously have nothing of value to offer.  Just go play tug with your dog and call yourself a Schutzhund expert. Whatever turns your crank.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

Hi Daniel welcome to the WDF ! Heck of an enterance I must say .

Tell us a little about yourself and how you came to be here .


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Hi Daniel,

In the interest of clarification. The Dobermann in the original
post was shutting down due to prong collar corrections NOT
e-collar corrections. Mr Castle stated that he had 100% success dealing with this issue by training a dog to recall
using an e-collar. You'll have to read through all 20 pages to
see if you can make sense of that train of thought




Daniel Audet said:


> OK... a bit of clarification. I was only commenting on an eCollar being able to help SOME fearful dogs. I can't say MOST or ALL. They are both words that I try / should to avoid with dog training.
> 
> A dog that is shutting down on an eCollar is most likely confused. I would highly suspect that someone has gone overboard with the level of corrections they are using if they dog is truly shut down. They also possibly / more than likely didn't do the initial training properly. If the dog is confused and being corrected at high levels, yeah this is possible. I personally have not ever had this happen. Fast and Good rarely occur in the same sentence.


----------



## Sonny Lee (Nov 11, 2009)

Hello everyone,

Thanks for those valuable inputs. Unfortunately, I am still unable to get any videos of the training. We did have a lengthy discussions in the club about what methods to use etc., and the decision was not to use the ecollar due to the unfamiliarity of the ecollar by the handler as well the the training director. It is not that the ecollar is no good, just their personal preference.

They continued the training with a lot of play and rewards and little to no corrections... and using childs' talk (if it make sense at all) in correcting the Dobermann. 

One interesting thing we found out by mistake is the Dobermann is very focused/ attracted to laser pointer! Someone pulled out a laser pointer and we decided to give it a try and the dog was obsessed with it! Ears were up, tail was straight and the handler has the dog's full attention :???:... The dog would do all OB nice, fast and accurate and did not even shut down when corrected (handler's overlook during the training session). I couldn't understand it... do you think the Dobermann's shut down was a reaction to the handler? Maybe the Dobermann knows that by shutting down when he is forced to do things he don't want to do, the handler will give up... and thus, the Dobermann is not weak nerve but doing an action to get a reaction he wanted from the handler... In short, he is training the handler instead to get a desired action from the handler?... now, it makes me think we don't know dogs as much as we think we do... :-k


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Sonny, I sent you a PM but obviously without seeing this dog your assessment mirrors what my initial impression was of the situation you initially described. I'm still hoping to see a video of this dog eventually.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Jim Nash said:


> I will just say from reading this discussion and many many very very similar internet discussions involving Lou , that at least for me I get it Lou , I get it .
> 
> YOU have been able to train dogs with similar problems with the ecollar and never failed . I GET IT !
> 
> With that said , I agree with others that I don't think it's a technique for every dog . I GET IT THOUGH . You've had success with it with many dogs , never failed and because of it recommend it for others due to your success .


Glad that you get it Jim. Some don't. Some not only don't get it, but deny that it can be done. Some not only don't get it but say that it won't solve this issue. At least one thinks that even suggesting this method is _"off topic!"_ 



Jim Nash said:


> I think your articles are the best I've seen on the internet involving the use of ecollars and recommend them to anyone interested in learning how to use one .


Thanks very much for the kind words. 



Jim Nash said:


> BUT my god talk about beating a dead horse !


If the horse was dead. People would not be responding in opposition to the method.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Cate Helfgott said:


> Hey Lou!
> 
> Thanks for the response! Wow...how horrifying if I'd actually plinked her at 15 rather then 2! Holy cow!! But in that case I guess it wouldn't have mattered whose method I used, how I fitted the collar or what brand I belted on...holy cow, what a no win situation! I was right before!! Much better that I had not used the e-collar in the first place!!


Horrifying, I agree. That problem with the Ecollar is a thing of the past and if you'd been using the professional line of collars it would not have happened. The problem was revealed by my methods and others who were using stim levels this low. If the Ecollar was used just for punishment, the issue never arose. 

Remember that this part of the conversation centered around you describing a dog that my methods would not work on. You wrote this,


> What I'm confused about is how you plinking her at the lowest level of stim is going to produce a reaction different then the puddle-of-goo-under-PT-cruiser reaction that my plinking her at the lowest level of stim produced.


It took awhile to get here but now we know that it was not due to you using a brand that did not go low enough but it was a defect that was going on with the tool that you did use. 

And so we're now back to asking you to describe a dog that you think that my methods won't work on.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Earlier I wrote,


> I was hoping to avoid another of your rude personal attacks Thomas. I can see that this was a waste of time. Even after a banning, your first post back in the thread continues them.





Thomas Barriano said:


> Your comments are "searches for truth"


I've said nothing about a _"search for truth."_ I'm merely providing one solution to the problem of a shutdown dog. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> and *anything anyone else posts * "is a rude personal attack"? [Emphasis added]


Not at all Thomas. YOUR posts in response to mine are typically "rude personal attacks." This is just another one of your lies. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> LOL IF you wanted to avoid a response you would NOT have quoted anything I wrote. POT Kettle ....


I see, so the only way to avoid a rude response is to not quote you! Interesting how you manage not to do this with others. Odd how many others manage NOT to do this. But again, when you don't have the facts to back up your argument, a personal attack is all that's left for some. ROFLMAO

Earlier I wrote,


> In any case, your experience with TWO *(WOW! TWO?) * dogs is hardly indicative of the entire breed. I've had more than that brought to my seminars. SOME of there were _"highly intelligent"_ and some were not. As to _"cookie cutter GSD SchH training"_ your comment really makes no sense, especially since I don't do SchH training. NONE of the Dobies that I worked were particularly _"handler sensitive"_ as your GENERALIZED statement said. And finally NO DOG _"responds well to corrections when they don't understand the exercise … or think that the correction is unfair …"_





Thomas Barriano said:


> The Working Dobermann world is pretty small and I probably know the majority of the dogs and owners, so my two are not the only Dobermanns I have experience with.


Just quoting back to you the information that YOU provided. Lol. 

Earlier you wrote


> My statements were NOT generalizations. They were based on hands on experience with two HOT Dobermanns.


Somehow I missed a statement that you'd worked with more than two Dobies. Can you show it please? Now suddenly you've worked with MORE than two of them. Hmm, Were you lying then or are you lying now? 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Besides it is two more Working Dobermanns then you have trained.


And here Thomas is talking out his a$$hole. He has no idea how many working Dobies I've worked with. AGAIN he's just guessing and making assumptions based on those guesses. Does it ever stop? 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Please feel free to provide names if you're going to claim experience with Dobermanns.


I don't take or keep names of the people who show up at my seminars. It's interesting but I've offered to supply names of people to you many times to support my statements. You've never accepted the offer. BUT SUDDENLY nothing will suffice BUT such names. 

I also LOVE how you're trying to twist the discussion to _working Dobies. _ NOWHERE did I say a word about them. And neither did the OP. In fact I doubt, due to the description of this dog's issue, that he IS from working lines. Making your admittedly very limited experience with them, (you told us "two dogs") just about useless to this discussion! 



Thomas Barriano said:


> HUH, Your method of fixing a problem of a Dobermann shutting down under corrections is to teach the recall and sit with an e-collar? and I don't get it? ROTFLMFAO


This is my method for treating just about any fearful dog, NOT just a Dobie. And I agree, you don't get it. 

Earlier I wrote,


> Asked and answered.





Thomas Barriano said:


> I must of missed it. How about a pointer to where this happened.


Sure Thomas. Back in post #54 I wrote this.


> Thomas you're specifically *UN*invited from my seminars due to exchanges like this one.  I can't abide a liar and you've shown those true colors repeatedly. [Emphasis added]


Earlier I wrote,


> I'm sure that my training is nowhere near that of whoever trained your dogs for you. LOL.





Thomas Barriano said:


> First off, I'm sure glad I'm not the only one that makes rude personal attacks, but I'm sure you'll explain how you're not attacking.


Oh no Thomas, but this is another cute, but obvious diversion. I've NEVER said that you are _"*the only one *that makes rude personal attacks."_ But it's obvious to anyone reading this that you've started them and have continued them, even when I've not responded in kind. I'm tired of "not responding in kind" and have decided that returning them is another way to handle them. 

Folks notice that Thomas has AGAIN sidestepped the question of having someone else train his dogs for him. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Secondly, thanks for realizing that my training is superior to yours.


Sorry that your reading skills are so poor Thomas. I was quite clear when I wrote _" I'm sure that my training is * nowhere near that of  whoever trained your dogs for you.  * _LOL. NOWHERE does it talk about YOU training your dogs. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> It has already been explained what HOT means


Yes and we've seen the huge pile of evidence that you've supplied that shows that YOU did the training on those dogs. Oh wait, you've supplied NOTHING. Not a single reference. NOR HAVE YOU OFFERED TO! ROFL. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> and that a decoy only "helps" with part of one third of Schutzhund training.


A good decoy doesn't even need the handler present to do most of the work. It can be done with the dog tied to a post. Is that what you are Thomas, a post? 



Thomas Barriano said:


> I've also explained how I am a TD and train all my own dogs.


Yes, so YOU say. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> So your silly "whoever trained your dogs for you" is a transparent cheap shot.


Just like your lies about my experience at CCPD and the questioning of my seminars. 

Earlier I wrote,


> Now who's off-topic.





Thomas Barriano said:


> Lou Castle....again LOL


Yep. Thomas when YOU go off topic and make accusations, it's necessary that I follow to correct your misconceptions and point out your many lies.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I believe few fearful dog would be helped by the use of an e-collar


Again we have Thomas discussing his theory on something. Largely he discounts theories when they come from others; but when it's HIS theory we're supposed to swallow it completely. I'm talking about the FACT that I've rehabbed quite a few fearful dogs personally with this tool/method and know of quite a few others who have done the same, one of whom has joined this discussion. I've also presented video to support my side. Of course Thomas has his opinion and we all know the saying about those. 

I believe and have proven it with every fearful dog that I've worked with, that MOST fearful dogs would be helped by the use of an Ecollar. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> because few handlers are experienced with them.


It takes little (or no) experience to learn to use an Ecollar as I suggest. I've been told that the on my site directions are clear so anyone who can read and follow simple instructions can get it done. Quite a few have. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Written instructions. no matter how well written, are subject to miss interpretation


As are videos, spoken instructions and virtually every other form of instruction that exists! 



Thomas Barriano said:


> and *hands on in person instruction is the most effective training method. *


Another of your now–famous generalizations. The TRUTH is that for *some people * _"hands on in person instruction is the most effective training method."_ But MANY people learn BETTER from the written word, videos and the spoken word. But you rarely let the truth intrude on your comments. Better to pretend that your opinion is fact! 

But EVEN IF IT WAS THE MOST EFFECTIVE, *there are still other methods. *AGAIN we see that you think that YOUR way is the only way! Something that you accuse me of, quite often, in spite of many statements to the contrary. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> As a aside. I disagree with your conclusion that the Dobermann that is being discussed is "fearfull" As I stated in my first response. I believe the dog is "shutting down" to correction because it is confused about what the handler wants and/or it feels the correction is unfair.


Please supply the evidence, based on what's been presented, to support this position. The OP has written this, _"*He knows all the commands. *Today, while training, *the handler corrected him for a couple of mistakes and he shut down."*_ Sure looks like the dog was overcorrected for a behavior *that he knew *and shutdown as a result of the correction _"for a couple of mistakes."_ 

We're told that *"he knows all the commands" *yet you think that he's confused about what the handler wants or feels that the correction is unfair. I think it's clear that you're wrong on this. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> Again the solution for confusion is NOT e-collar stimulation. The solution is building a better bond with the dog


NO ONE has written that the solution for confusion is Ecollar stimulation. This is just another of your Straw Man arguments. 

Merely teaching the dog the recall with the Ecollar as I recommend will give a big start to it. Then, teaching the sit as I recommend and using it in various situations will build his confidence.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

David Frost said:


> I see where it has worked on many dogs. I have no reason to not believe Lou. I can also see pitfalls with some dogs.


What pitfalls do you see David and with what kind of dogs? Always looking to learn.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Why has anyone come to the conclusion that we're talking about a fearful dog?


Because that's what the OP describing the situation sounds like to us. 



Thomas Barriano said:


> There is a BIG difference between a dog "shutting down" and just not doing anything because they're confused (like I stated in my initial reply) and a fearful dog. Why are people posting videos of shelter dogs


Because fear is fear. One way out of it is to train the recall and the sit with my methods. 

I've asked for you to present evidence to support your position and you've not supplied any. It's not unusual for trainers to disagree as to the cause for an issue. Heck it's hard to get two of them to agree where to have dinner! 


Thomas Barriano said:


> The OP was about a Dobermann who shut down after being corrected by his OWNER, not a shelter dog afraid of everyone


That should make the Dobie a much easier case. He's afraid of a situation not _"everyone."_


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Earlier I wrote,


> This is not a _"give a slight tug"_ situation. You pull hard enough so that the dog moves.





Steve Strom said:


> That makes my point Lou. That significantly reduces the role of the ecollar.


Steve if you were to do this without the Ecollar, using treats praise and touch, to the shutdown dog in this discussion you'd be pulling him towards you over and over, ad infinitum. The leash pull is what gets the dog to move towards the handler but it's only pulling AT THE FIRST PART OF THE movement. The dog is 15' (or whatever the length of the Flexi lead is) away from the handler but the pressure of the pull is only applied for about the first five feet of that movement. The discomfort from the Ecollar is what keeps him moving away from where he was lying down. The Ecollar stim is what makes him want to stand with the handler and what gets him to move with the handler when he walks away.

If you tried this with the fearful dog in the video you'd get bit. He was not interested in having treats, praise or the rest. He WAS interested in escaping the discomfort of an Ecollar stim.

With a normal dog (meaning he's not troubled as with the dog in this thread or in the video) You'll get a recall with what you're describing but AGAIN you're missing the point. The *recall is not being taught with the Ecollar for the purpose of OB here, it's part of a bigger plan, the purpose of which is to build confidence. *



Steve Strom said:


> But just going by Robin’s video that points to it as only one part with no mention of the actual importance of it and the fact that you rely on the line, not higher stim, I find it to be unnesessary for this.


The trainer in the video is using the Ecollar to show the dog that being away from her is uncomfortable. In any case I don't use treats for this and I get the same results. OBVIOUSLY the treats, praise, touch etc., are not necessary. And going back to the shutdown dog, he'd not be interested in the treats or the rest, at all.



Steve Strom said:


> The technique of following, rewarding, encouraging, and re-assuring with a touch will all work without the Ecollar


The shutdown dog would not be interested in any treats, or _"encouraging, and re–assuring with a touch."_ I'll remind you what the OP wrote,


> Today, while training, the handler corrected him for a couple of mistakes and he shut down. After that, the drive in this dog is just gone! Zero! *Nothing can make him do anything anymore! He just lay down on the field and look at you! * [Emphasis added]


Trying to encourage this dog, lure him with a treat, praise or touch would do NOTHING as the OP clearly said. But showing him that staying away from the trainer with the Ecollar WOULD! One problem with the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) is that a reinforcement is only going to have a certain value to the dog. Sometimes, as in shutdown, they lose their value. But an aversive is, by definition, always aversive.



Steve Strom said:


> you can witness it at group obedience classes that have a fair amount of dogs exactly like Marley.


Gonna have to call NONSENSE on this statement. You WILL NOT see dogs like Marley at any group OB classes. Marley would bite anyone who came near him, including his owner.



Steve Strom said:


> Just like with the ecollar, the results will be dependent on the skill of the person.


All that happens with my methods with a less skilled person, even someone with average timing, is that it takes more reps to get the point across.



Steve Strom said:


> What you won’t see is anyone of any skill level using an ecollar alone, no other tools, to accomplish this trust and confidence building


It depends on your definition of _"other tools."_ If you mean treats, you're completely wrong. I rarely use them. If you mean praise and touch, you're right, I use them all the time. But so what? It's rare in training a dog that ONLY one tool is used no matter what that tool is, what method of training is being used and what the dog is being trained to do.



Steve Strom said:


> because even in your method Lou, the use of a tool that sends a dog running past you (that was your long standing, un-edited wording) defines confusion and as has been pointed out, that’s counter to learning.


It makes no difference how _"long standing"_ my previous statement was. It was not a good picture of what happens with my methods. I have little doubt that when you use an Ecollar to punish that you often get a dog running in fear or pain. It does not happen with my methods. The stim level is just too low.

And so your statement about a dog _ "running past [me]"_ is not only misleading and inaccurate, it's no longer a proper quotation. Dogs getting stimmed at the earliest stages of my training don't run to a new location, they amble! Earlier I posted a video of a dog getting his first stim  HERE. The running that you imagine happens would certainly happen there, before the dog knew what the stim was, yet this dog does nothing beyond look at the ground.

And here we have you theorizing AGAIN. You've not only NOT DONE IT, you've never even seen it. If you had, you'd know better than to make such statements.



Steve Strom said:


> My point is the ecollar is a good tool, but not the nessesary part of any of this work


Fact is Steve, I've often written that the Ecollar is not a _"necessary"_ part of ANY WORK. We trained dogs for thousands of years before Ecollars came along. But they're here now and we'd be foolish not to use them. Computers and cars are not _"necessary"_ either. But one would be fooish not to make use of them.



Steve Strom said:


> and with your descriptions of it being so innocuous that its no more discomfort then the aversion to the hot sun, that *imho* makes it nothing more then a poor substitute for my voice in teaching new behaviors or communicating anything to my dog.


And again Steve, you're talking about merely teaching something with the Ecollar and I'm talking about much more. I'm talking about the unseen nature of the discomfort giving the ability to rehabilitate a fearful dog, such as the one in the OP.



Steve Strom said:


> *Imo* your method stops right where training begins and says, "That’s all folks".


Steve this makes no sense. Someone who knows nothing of how to train a dog can follow my articles and end up with a dog that's trained to do all that exists in basic OB. Many have done it. That's what they were written for and that's what they accomplish. It just so happens that teaching the recall and the sit with the Ecollar results in many highly fearful dogs gaining in confidence. You can get similar results with the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" (and that's not meant as a dig) but it takes, week or months and often does NOT give good results at all.



Steve Strom said:


> Like I said, so innocuous that it’s a poor substitute for my own voice.


It can be as innocuous as the dog needs.



Steve Strom said:


> Even at your purely altruistic financial loss, the price of the collar would seem like a waste of money for myself. I guess 3000 people would disagree and so would Dogtra.


Oh no Steve. There are FAR MORE than just _"3,000 people and … Dogtra."_ Three–thousand is just the number that I've personally worked with. And there are many more Ecollar manufacturers than just Dogtra. Ecollar annual sales are probably in the millions.



Steve Strom said:


> In spite of what you’ve said, it does *imho *seem like good marketing and a way to expand your customer base.


So I can lose even MORE money? ROFL. Yeah Steve that makes lots of sense. And there are so many extremely fearful dogs too. Yeah I've created a million dollar niche with this use of the Ecollar. ROFLMAO.



Steve Strom said:


> What did and still does make sense to me is the use of it as a corrective device is where the real value of it is. So I’ll continue to use it *like most people *and I’ll try to figure out which things it will help me with and not bother with it where I don’t need it


As I've said many times, as long as you're happy with your results and they're achieved humanely, I'm happy for you.



Steve Strom said:


> but what I won’t do is bother to respond to you anymore


OK. Somehow I'll learn to live with that. I hope that you're a man of your word.



Steve Strom said:


> Lou. Sometimes the way I phrase things are nothing more then an attempt at being respectful.


REALLY?!. When you implied that Dan was my _dummy _that was an attempt to be respectful?! I guess we have a wide divergence as to the definition of that word. Too bad you're not going to reply to me any longer, I'd love to have heard where you phrased something in _"an attempt at being respectful."_



Steve Strom said:


> I know my sense of humor is grating to you, so I won’t kid around or take shots at you and the members of Team Castle.


And in this disclaimer is ANOTHER cheap shot. LOL I have a _team _ now? What you call your _"sense of humor"_ is nothing but a childish excuse for rudeness.



Steve Strom said:


> keyboard viagra


Now *THAT *IS funny.



Steve Strom said:


> I’ll just put you and Daniel on ignore


I wonder why some people feel a need to publicly announce that they're putting someone on ignore? In any case, it's good that this forum has that feature. Some people have little will power or self control.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Mr Castle stated that he had 100% success dealing with this issue by training a dog to recall using an e-collar.


Thomas YOU'RE A LIAR. First I recommended that the Ecollar was the tool of choice for this problem. Next, to be more specific, I recommended that people read THIS success story. Clearly it shows that the dog was rehabilitated by teaching *BOTH the recall and the sit. *And I've said this repeatedly. 

Teaching the recall is ONLY PART of the program. 

You managed to state my solution accurately once before but NOW you tell this lie.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Sonny Lee said:


> do you think the Dobermann's shut down was a reaction to the handler? Maybe the Dobermann knows that by shutting down when he is forced to do things he don't want to do, the handler will give up...


Very possible, particularly if he's done this sort of thing before and has had success in getting the handler to stop doing whatever she was doing. 



Sonny Lee said:


> and thus, the Dobermann is not weak nerve but doing an action to get a reaction he wanted from the handler... In short, he is training the handler instead to get a desired action from the handler?... now, it makes me think we don't know dogs as much as we think we do... :-k


Dogs do what works for them.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

My GOD!!!!!!! Give it a rest already!!!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Nicole Stark said:


> My GOD!!!!!!! Give it a rest already!!!


When you get to be a moderator or the list owner you get to tell me this. Until then … well I'm being polite this minute. Feel free NOT to read my posts. My feelings wont' be hurt in the slightest.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

If you really were being polite you wouldn't be hogging someone else's thread to prove your right.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> When you get to be a moderator or the list owner you get to tell me this. ....


Why? Why doesn't she have the same freedom to post that everyone else has? 

And look at how short and non-tedious and non-repetitive and to-the-point her post is. :lol:

You certainly don't have to take her post under advisement, but yes, she gets to say it.


----------



## Edward Egan (Mar 4, 2009)

wow, wow!, WOW!!!


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Nicole Stark said:


> If you really were being polite you wouldn't be hogging someone else's thread to prove your right.


Nicole I'm responding to the comments of others as to what they think is best. Somehow you think that it's OK for them to comment but it's NOT OK for me. I disagree and since you don't own this forum I don't give a damn what you think about this. My posting does not stop anyone else from posting. 

As long as people are telling lies about me, I'll respond. 

As long as people are stating the same thing over and over again, and it's wrong, I'll respond. 

As long as I feel like it, I'll respond unless a moderator says different. That ain't you so you can stuff you demand. YOUR initial post in this exchange was the rude one. It had NOTHING to do with the topic and was just a rude comment aimed at me. And now you continue. You could easily have done this in PM's but instead you took the low road. I'm happy to join you as long as you continue in this vein.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Edward Egan said:


> wow, wow!, WOW!!!


Edward, my post was supposed to be an amusing way of saying that that we do seem to be going over the same ground over and over .... :wink:

That's all.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Why? Why doesn't she have the same freedom to post that everyone else has?


Sure does. And I have the right to laugh at her demands. 



Connie Sutherland said:


> And look at how short and non-tedious and non-repetitive and to-the-point her post is.


You forgot _"offtopic."_ 



Connie Sutherland said:


> You certainly don't have to take her post under advisement, but yes, she gets to say it.


Until she gets to be my mother, my boss or a moderator it has no effect on my posting. It was written as a demand, not as advice. And while she can demand anything she wants, I can (and will) ignore such demands till the cows come home.

And I found nothing amusing about your post.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

Hey Sonny, all I'm seeing is mostly blank pages now but I want to apologise for any contribution to your thread taking this turn, that I may have made.


----------



## Steve Strom (May 25, 2008)

connie sutherland said:


> why? Why doesn't she have the same freedom to post that everyone else has?
> 
> And look at how short and non-tedious and non-repetitive and to-the-point her post is. :lol:
> 
> You certainly don't have to take her post under advisement, but yes, she gets to say it.


roflmao!!!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Lou Castle said:


> ... Until she gets to be my mother, my boss or a moderator it has no effect on my posting.


As in "you're not the boss of me" ?

:lol:

Man. I'd better stop posting. I don't know when I last saw such a wall of animosity as I see today all over computerland. Must be me.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Yes, of course my post to you was rude. It was intended to be so. I thought I was pretty clear about my intentions because you obviously cannot take a hint. Sonny posted a follow up today which could have made for good discussion if you didn't pile all that dirt on top of it. That's merely what I was getting at, no transparency intended. But if it seemed that way you have my sincere apologies.

That aside I assure you, there won't be further responses from me to you. Until today and only after you responded to me have I ever bothered to read your posts. That's because I find your posting style generally to be highly repetitive, nagging, and frankly bothersome to the eye. 

Have a good day sir.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> As in "you're not the boss of me" ?


There's nothing quite as stupid or as big a waste of time and space as someone, who has no authority, giving orders.


----------



## Lou Castle (Apr 4, 2006)

Nicole Stark said:


> Yes, of course my post to you was rude. It was intended to be so.


Yes, that was obvious. No reason for it. Just more gratuitous bullshit. Just someone with little self-control throwing a tantrum. 



Nicole Stark said:


> I thought I was pretty clear about my intentions because you obviously cannot take a hint.


I can take a hint. What I don't take is orders from people who have no authority or power to give them. 



Nicole Stark said:


> Sonny posted a follow up today which could have made for good discussion if you didn't pile all that dirt on top of it.


Nothing I posted stopped ANYONE from responding to Sonny's post. Now YOU'RE the one _"piling the dirt."_ But of course it's perfectly OK when YOU do it. ROFLMAO. 



Nicole Stark said:


> That's merely what I was getting at, no transparency intended. *But if it seemed that way *you have my sincere apologies.


I don't think, given the rest of your post and that this _apology _is conditional, that it's genuine. You continue in the same frame of mind as your initial recent post. It's just something so that you can later say, "well, I apologized so I'm the bigger person." 



Nicole Stark said:


> That aside I assure you, there won't be further responses from me to you.


Gonna cry myself to sleep tonight. 



Nicole Stark said:


> Until today and only after you responded to me have I ever bothered to read your posts.


I really don't give a damn what you read or don't read. 



Nicole Stark said:


> That's because I find your posting style generally to be highly repetitive, nagging, and frankly bothersome to the eye.


MORE RUDENESS. Your apology was a lie! I could not give a damn how you _"find my posting style."_ I find your posting style to be rude, ignorant, boring and stupid. But until this personal attack I kept it to myself. 



Nicole Stark said:


> Have a good day sir.


Drop dead.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I think 200 plus post of children's games is more then enough!


----------

