# Non-Compulsion Training



## Patrick Murray (Mar 27, 2006)

Have any of you ever fully trained a PSD, PPD or sport dog without EVER using compulsion? Or, have you ever trained such a dog and RARELY were required to use compulsion? 

I was taught a cookie-cutter approach to dog training otherwise known as the "yank and crank". My first dog (as an adult) is my current ten year-old female American GSD, Greta. We got her at 8 weeks of age and after having her two months I had the bright idea to call a local trainer to come to my home to help us train our dog. I was clueless then to the fact that Greta is very submissive and has very weak nerves. Nevertheless, our "trainer" put on the prong and when she didn't respond appropriately it was time to give it a rip! And then he broke out the old penny jug to shake while yelling at her if she did something wrong. Her nerves went from bad to worse. Needless to say this "trainer" was an IDIOT. 

I used a lot of compulsion with my second dog, Jake. The Baden K-9 protege that helped me "train" Jake was just like Baden K-9 in that everything was yank and crank to the max! 

I realize that different dogs require different methods and some dogs might need more or less compulsion but if more is needed then is it possible the dog's makeup is lacking something that an ideal working dog would possess? If the dog has the drive and desire to work and please, why then is it necessary to yank and crank all the time? 

I want to work really hard on my next dog to absolutely avoid/limit any compulsion whatsoever. I picked up the Ivan Balabanov DVD's and they look really good. After looking them over I started to wonder if it's possible to fully train a dog without ever having to use compulsion. And who better to ask than you folks here.


----------



## Matthew Grubb (Nov 16, 2007)

Look out cause you just stepped in a hornets nest… This is a great discussion topic but can get VERY heated!

I was taught a mixture of motivational and compulsion. I have found that the mix works best for me and the dogs I work with. I do however LOVE compulsion free training as a means of problem solving with dogs that have been damaged by poor training or have conflicts with their handlers. No one in my area that I know of has ever trained a PSD with all motivational training….

That said, I would bet Bob knows someone who has!!


----------



## Patrick Murray (Mar 27, 2006)

Thanks Matthew. I would hope that people can share their experiences and their viewpoints without getting ugly with others. After all, this is a community to share and to help one another, not to beat up each other.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I titled my GSD to a SchHII and the AKC CDX without ever giving a physical correction. I fully expect to get his SchH III and his AKC UD this year. Our whole club uses operant conditioning and with my second dog I just started changing over to the clicker instead of a marker word. I"m seeing great results with the clicker over a verbal marker. 
I firmly believe the higher the drives and the more serious the dog is, this method works all that much better. Way less conflict between the dog and handler. 
I have quit trying to convince non believers though. :grin: :grin: 
Our methods are very similar to Balibanov's.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Unfortunately I don't know of anyone that has done this with PSD. Understandably, the repercussions could be bad if things didn't work out. Like any dog training it's about knowing how and believing in what your doing. My second dog is going much quicker and I don't think he's got near the learning capacity as my first. I'VE gotten better at it!


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

I have written about this in another post and yes, there is a time and place for it. You did say "training?" Folks who yank the life out of their dogs, kids, or anything else do it for two reasons: 1) they can and 2) they have NO open vision on training. These folks are largely one dimensional. Anyone can call themself a trainer. The true test to their skill is in the methodolgy used and the outcomes genereated.


Yank and crank is part of the old 1960's Koehler style of training. I have also seen folks for used e-collars for the updated version of Y & K. They don't get the robotic reaction they want from the dog and they beat the life out of it with whatever tools they have at hand.

A true teacher, coach, trainer, or whatever the title uses those techniques to TEACH a new concept. *Beating it into the thing is not teaching, its abuse!* I view compulsion as something that should only be used AFTER the concept has been LEARNED and MASTERED. I am an educator by trade and a K-9 trainer. If I used compulsion on my human students for every new topic we covered, I would have a class size of zero.

Since you did say training, that involves breaking things down into small targeted topics or pieces. It then requires you to introduce newer pieces, and finally putting all the pieces together to create the big picture. After that you test, retest, and make it a practice or habit. Folks who yank, use electric, kick, always prong, and beat the life out of their animals should be shamed in public, called out as the low life slime that I see them being.


----------



## marcy bukkit (Oct 4, 2007)

I have yet to fully train a dog without corrections, but each dog receives fewer corrections than the last. I only use corrections now at advanced levels of proofing or to stop specific behaviors before they become dangerous.

To some extent my current living arrangements don't allow me the opportunity to go as far as I would like to without correction. I live with roommates and I can't give my dogs the leeway to experiment as much as I could if I lived alone, which is why I am looking for a house of my own.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Each time a discussion such as this pops up, I find it more and more interesting. Particular interesting to me are comments about the '60's. It seems that we dinosaurs from the 60's must be yank and crank trainers. I mean if Koehler did it, that must have been the only way. My first professional dog school was conducted at Hindenburg Kasern, Wiesbaden Germany, in April of 1966. The instructor, a man in his late 40's probably, was an ex WWII paratrooper from the German Army. He was a pretty tough guy, that really didn't care all that much for Americans. He loved dog training and tolerated anyone that he felt had the potential of being a dog handler. The biggest way to get on his bad side was; not enough praise. The vast majority of the training we did was positive reinforcement. Mostly verbal and physical praise. Food was not allowed. Dogs were not physically abused, nor were they beaten into submission. This was long before all the fancy terminology, currently in vogue, was used. A basic rule strictly enforced by Mr. Hans was; never correct (translated to verbal/physical corrections) for a behavior a dog has not learned. He called it "unfair". In truth, and unashamedly, my dog training philosphy has changed little since then. Certainly I feel I have more experience, but the foundation, in my opinion was solid. I still teach; positive reinforcement, without question, is a powerful method of dog training. That training becomes even more powerful when there is a consequence to misbehavior. 

DFrost


----------



## Amber Scott Dyer (Oct 30, 2006)

David Frost said:


> positive reinforcement, without question, is a powerful method of dog training. That training becomes even more powerful when there is a consequence to misbehavior.
> 
> DFrost


=D> =D> =D> love it, David, can I quote you?? 

I would also be interested to hear experiences from someone (Selena? :wink: ) that has tried mostly positive training on a very hard dog and how successful that was. I always hear about very, very hard KNPV dogs that are extremely difficult to train even with heavy corrections and how hard those dogs can be on their handlers. I've always wondered if this kind of dog, obviously being high drive, would be more receptive to positive reinforcement training - I know there are some trainers that would see it as an exercise in futility.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Amber Scott said:


> I always hear about very, very hard KNPV dogs that are extremely difficult to train even with heavy corrections and how hard those dogs can be on their handlers. I've always wondered if this kind of dog, obviously being high drive, would be more receptive to positive reinforcement training - I know there are some trainers that would see it as an exercise in futility.


Wow, you've been reading my mind! I would love to try this, or learn more from somebody who has.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Sorry David but think about what was out there for us to use. Not much but the yank and crank. Think of the number of new books, DVDs, videos, clinics, "experts" and other things that we have today. Name for me 10 national field trial champions who never used Y & K. Or look at the old style police dog training...pretty hard stuff. And like in education, there are ever changing methodologies which make past ones look CRAZY.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I couldn't name 10 national field champions of any type. I live/lived the "old style" police dog training. I don't remember it being all that hard. A change over the years and modernization does not necessarily translate to "better". When I went to school, you learned. Every boy carried a pocket knife. In high school we all had guns in our vehicles during hunting season. Modernization hasn't improved on that. 

DFrost


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Amber Scott said:


> =D> =D> =D> love it, David, can I quote you??
> 
> .


Be my guest.

Help yourself.

DFrost


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

David Frost said:


> I couldn't name 10 national field champions of any type. I live/lived the "old style" police dog training. I don't remember it being all that hard. A change over the years and modernization does not necessarily translate to "better". When I went to school, you learned. Every boy carried a pocket knife. In high school we all had guns in our vehicles during hunting season. Modernization hasn't improved on that.
> 
> DFrost


And with that I can agree 100%


----------



## Darryl Richey (Jul 3, 2006)

Part of the debate that has to be taken into consideration is what a person considers to be compulsion, punishment,etc. etc. Even the high end trainers, competitors, and I'm talking about International, World team competitors will use corrections. The big key here would be consistency and following there rules that they set up for the dog to understand. 

I recently have changed my system to include heavy doses of OC. I knew I had to change my style to get different results with the type of dogs I tend to own. I don't believe that you can train a dog exclusivly one way or the other. All "cookies and belliy rubs" nor "Do it or Die" attitude brings out the best in the dog. I do believe it has to be a fine blend, but most important it has to be consitant and hold to the rules that the dog has learned to understand.


Darryl


----------



## Darryl Richey (Jul 3, 2006)

I hit "send" a little too quick. A final little thought to go with my previous post. 
I know when I went to my first seminar that was OC based I was a big doubter. Through time I realised that my perceptions as what are most that I talk to is that they won't use any punishment to "enforce" behaviors, but that isn't true. They may not be considered purests, but it's another form of a system that helps train the dogs. 

Darryl


----------



## Daniel Cox (Apr 17, 2006)

Patrick Murray said:


> Have any of you ever fully trained a PSD, PPD or sport dog without EVER using compulsion? Or, have you ever trained such a dog and RARELY were required to use compulsion?
> 
> I was taught a cookie-cutter approach to dog training otherwise known as the "yank and crank". My first dog (as an adult) is my current ten year-old female American GSD, Greta. We got her at 8 weeks of age and after having her two months I had the bright idea to call a local trainer to come to my home to help us train our dog. I was clueless then to the fact that Greta is very submissive and has very weak nerves. Nevertheless, our "trainer" put on the prong and when she didn't respond appropriately it was time to give it a rip! And then he broke out the old penny jug to shake while yelling at her if she did something wrong. Her nerves went from bad to worse. Needless to say this "trainer" was an IDIOT.
> 
> ...


Here you go. This is my opinion. I was very reluctant to post this but this is how I feel. This is a small portion of the logic I use to train my dogs. There are many other ways to train but I believe this is best for me. I do mention compulsion many times and let me clarify what compulsion is in my opinion.

Compulsion is a correction w/ with a pinch collar/fur saver, a smack on the head/ass, a louder voice, or just about any other means to get the point across to the dog. I do not use the electric collar that much. I just feel very uncomfortable with it. I really like using my hands because I always have those but many people feel this is cruel to the dog. Remember there is no pinch collar, leash, or electric in a trial. The hands can be a very nice tool and no I do not punch my dog. I just use them as a means of letting the dog know I am the boss.

Today in Schutzhund you must make a very nice picture for the Judge in all phases. The dog and handler must be a team. Too much pressure+compulsion=shit picture. I believe that the best trainers in the world train dogs to work in a very high level of drive. They teach the dog how to listen and operate in a very high level of drive. The drive in obedience is obtained through motivation. That motivation can be food or toy. The helper is the motivation in protection. The best trainers in the world teach dogs to get in drive and sustain it. They get the dog in drive and use corrections to make the picture proper. I do believe it is possible to train without compulsion but it is very difficult and I do not believe you can compete at the highest level unless you find that special dog. 

Compulsion is not bad but necessary to make the picture clear to the dog. Too much compulsion and the drive is gone and your picture is shit or your dog shuts down. I always find myself trying to train with the proper balance. Sometimes I do use too much compulsion and I then look to better ways to fix the issue. I drink a beer and discuss it with my training partner and we come up with a solution. Sometimes it works and sometimes it does not.

I can not imagine how much hair I would pull out without training with corrections. I always try and make if fair with my dog and teach them the right way from the beginning and then proof it. Sometimes there is never a need for any corrections to make an exercise perfect but most of the time you need just enough to make it clear for the dog.

thx...


----------



## Phil Dodson (Apr 4, 2006)

In my line of work (PSD) I tell my students you only get (1) time to get it right, anymore than that, and it could cost your municipality, county, or yourself a major lawsuit. So I do use compulsion when absolutely necessary and have no regrets when forced to. Beside that however, the majority of our training is motivational and with a lot of rewards when each exercise is done correctly.

Not to start an argument, Besides fixing problems with dogs, where in Koehlers obedience does he use harsh or inhumane methods? I was fortunate to speak to him on more than one occasion, have 2 of his books signed personally, and observed his students training, I never observed any harsh or humane methods of obedience training.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Dan if you don't feel comfortable with electric, don't wear the collar! :lol:


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Phil Dodson said:


> I never observed any harsh or humane methods of obedience training.


Don't you mean inhumane methods? Not picking...


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Phil, it's been my experience that very few have ever read Koehlers. They've heard of him, perhaps have heard other say what they heard was in the book, or perhaps have read a page or two. I know over the years I've heard a lot of things poor old Bill, had supposedly written. He wasn't a literary genious, he did however train a dog or two in his day. 

DFrost


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I grew up with the Koehler books. I can't disagree with the fact that he was very successful. It's just been my choice to alter my training methods.
I still would have no problems with giving physical corrections in training, if needed. Thus far I haven't had to. House manners are a bit different even though both are more leadership issues as opposed to training methods.


----------



## Daniel Cox (Apr 17, 2006)

Howard Gaines III said:


> Dan if you don't feel comfortable with electric, don't wear the collar! :lol:


Yeah. I took it to work the other day. We started seeing who could take the biggest shock. It was quite funny. I am a Network Engineer in an IT department and work with a bunch of geeks.

I do not really mind the electric but when I use it I use it to get a point across to a dog. I have used it for a quick down when the dog is a good distance from me and for running blinds. I only had to use it after my dog came around blind 4. I gave a little stimulation and he said yes daddy very quickly.

I feel that the electric is the quick way out sometimes but then again some dogs really need it. Just me.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Bob, I'm not a Koehlerite (I just made that up). I have, however read his books (he has more than one). It was almost required reading for the young dog trainer in the 60's. Like many trainers there are some points he makes that make a lot of sense. There are also those areas I don't agree with. Not a whole lot has changed with some of the more modern approaches and trainers that I read about. I don't know how someone would beat into submission and teach them to bite. Somehow the logic there escapes me. Anytime I read about how the "old guys" were nothing more than yank and crankers I like to point out that while that may have been someones experience, it wasn't mine. Yank and cranker old guys, b/h v. f/b, and psuedo drugs, I just can't avoid the discussion. 

DFrost


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

David Frost said:


> Bob, I'm not a Koehlerite (I just made that up). I have, however read his books (he has more than one). It was almost required reading for the young dog trainer in the 60's. Like many trainers there are some points he makes that make a lot of sense. There are also those areas I don't agree with. Not a whole lot has changed with some of the more modern approaches and trainers that I read about. I don't know how someone would beat into submission and teach them to bite. Somehow the logic there escapes me. Anytime I read about how the "old guys" were nothing more than yank and crankers I like to point out that while that may have been someones experience, it wasn't mine. Yank and cranker old guys, b/h v. f/b, and psuedo drugs, I just can't avoid the discussion.
> 
> DFrost


I've got his Basic Obedience and his Guard Dog Training. After all, I am also a child of the 60s......if I recall correctly. :lol: 
I do agree that a lot of it still makes sense. 
When I talk about my training methods today, I, am, in no way putting down the "old" methods. They DO work. 
I also understand why you wouldn't (shouldn't) change your training methods.
I'm having fun with sport training. That's not an option for you.........Till the Dock Diving gets started. :grin: :grin: :grin: :wink:


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Daniel you have far too much free time on your hands. When you get popped from your own tool, it makes you mindful of what the dog has to deal with. I have used it and on the lowest settings get results. This isn't a fad for folks in your field is it???8)


----------

