# Motivational Training Only (sorry Mr.Koehler)



## Kat LaPlante

Has anyone on the forum successfully trained and titled a working dog using only motivational means and never even an ounce of cumpulsion? Is this even possible?


----------



## Jack Roberts

I think that Morgan Spector has titled dogs with only motivational training. The dogs were for obedience and not protection sport. 

You can see his book here:

http://www.amazon.com/Clicker-Training-Obedience-Shaping-Performance-Positively/dp/0962401781


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I don't think dogs live long enough for that.


----------



## Joby Becker

It can be done...takes a great trainer,a great bond with great communication, a lot of time and the right dog for it...to do it....none of which I have

I imagine the bitework would be the most difficult area, could be wrong


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Maybe it could be done but you'd never get the best potential out of the dog


----------



## Kat LaPlante

Joby Becker said:


> It can be done...takes a great trainer,a great bond with great communication, a lot of time and the right dog for it...to do it....none of which I have
> 
> I imagine the bitework would be the most difficult area, could be wrong


I wonder if maybe the bite work would not be the easir part of it. Teach a good solid out first and then go in small steps from there. Reinforce all the minute details everytime the dog got lucky until he figured it out....... 

But I bet you could end up with a really fat dog from all the treats and then youd loose all your points on the long jump and pallisade anyway:???::???::???:


----------



## Timothy Stacy

You could also try SMS, I hear it's all motivational! The dog becomes motivated to avoid shock


----------



## Joby Becker

Kat LaPlante said:


> I wonder if maybe the bite work would not be the easir part of it. Teach a good solid out first and then go in small steps from there. Reinforce all the minute details everytime the dog got lucky until he figured it out.......
> 
> But I bet you could end up with a really fat dog from all the treats and then youd loose all your points on the long jump and pallisade anyway:???::???::???:


competitive bitework without compulsion would probably be impossible with the type of dogs I like personally...


----------



## Aamer Sachedina

My female Farrah was nearly completely titled to SCH3 with next to no compulsion. The same with her sister Fresca who is owned by a club member of mine. Since then I have used compulsion from time to time. 

The one place that I have had to use compulsion is outing the sleeve once it has been slipped.

Now, the reality is that my answer above is not quite accurate because when I say compulsion and what I believe the OP meant is physical compulsion. My female and her sister are generally very biddable dogs. My female is pretty low on the social order naturally. So a lot of the time while I was using positive punishment, it came in the form of social pressure "NO". Positive punishment is part of training in my opinion when you are training dogs in a highly driven motivational state of mind. The amount and form you have to resort to use is dependent on:

- Foundation work
- Level of drive
- Physical and psychological sensitivity of the dog
- Dog's mental makeup in general

My next dog will be a male who is likely to be from a line of more assertive dogs and will likely require more positive punishment of the physical form. I think all four quadrants of reinforcement are required for the best performance.


----------



## Anne Jones

If memory serves me correctly...

Bob Scott has SchH titled his GSD with positive motovational training only. I'm sure he will appear here at some point & confirm this. 

I'm quite sure that there are others that have done so as well, but they may not be posters here.


----------



## Tamara McIntosh

Kat LaPlante said:


> I wonder if maybe the bite work would not be the easir part of it. Teach a good solid out first and then go in small steps from there. Reinforce all the minute details everytime the dog got lucky until he figured it out.......
> 
> But I bet you could end up with a really fat dog from all the treats and then youd loose all your points on the long jump and pallisade anyway:???::???::???:


Kat, for most really driven dogs, the tug/decoy/helper are far higher on the dogs "want" list than food. Depending on the dog, how strongs its individual drives are (food drive vs play.prey, etc) and how quickly it would switch its drives it could be possible. For my dog, for example, his drive to fight with the decoy is far stronger than his food drive. There is no food made that will entice him off the decoy when he is biting (I know this as I tried it for a time, but it was completely futile).

I believe that Bob Scott , a moderator on this forum, took a dog to sch 3 with only positive motivational methods?

Tamara McIntosh


----------



## Jerry Cudahy

Dr. Andre Vandergeten invented motivational dog training. He is the man behind Ivan B along with many other people who have gone to the worlds and won.

His work with lazer light and detection training is steller.

http://andrevandergeten.com/default.aspx


----------



## Gillian Schuler

OP!! Tell me first what you think compulsion is!

I do a lot of motivational training as far as it goes! However, when there is a much, much, greater distraction than a football, tug lying on the fiedl during obedience, namely the helper in the hide, then I could hold sausage in front of my dog, he wouldn't be interested and over short or long, "compulsion" comes into the "game".

It's not a bad thing "compulsion" - sometimes a "no" is enough - sometimes it's not - it depends. I see handlers hold their dogs back by the collar to make sure they race with vigour to the helper. I make mine sit quietly by my side with eye contact and only then do I release him to go.

I think "compulsion haters" have to step down a bit. We haven't got children but if we had and if they didn't feel like going to school one morning - I guess I'd use "compulsion" and not "friendly persuasion".

If you all think about it, there is "compulsion" in everything we do with the dog together, starting with the first day he enters the holy house and wants to throw his weight about! The non-compulsive handlers let him be but "pay up" comes later. The others set him his limits "compulsion" and have less trouble later.


----------



## Doug Humphrey

I believe it was Sue Barwig that wrote a book on positive only obedience as it related to Schutzhund. Ray Allen used to carry it. But I think it only addresssed obedience and not protection or tracking. The positive only viewpoint was resolved for me several years ago. One of the mantra's of the positive only movement is that "you can't train a whale with a prong collar" Very true. I was at Sea World in Florida. We watched the Dolphin part of the show and they performed flawlessly. Kudos to positive reinforcement. Then there was a delay of about 10 minutes. Finally, a handler came out and announced "We are going to have to cancel the Whale portion of our show. The whales are not cooperating today". Being a police dog trainer that resolved the debate for me right there. I can't have my dogs deciding not to perform. The counter claim will be that they can decide not to perform anyway. True but it is much less likely if they understand there are repurcussions that go with that decision.

I always teach using positive reinforcement. But telling a dog what it is doing wrong holds as much valuable information as telling it what it is doing right. This does not necessarily mean one has to use physical correction. You can be as creative with adversives as you can be with positive reinforcement. Using both provides balanced information, yin and yang. My 2 cents....

Respectfully,

Doug Huumphrey

"I know a few things about a few things"


----------



## Martine Loots

Joby Becker said:


> It can be done...takes a great trainer,a great bond with great communication, a lot of time and* the right dog for it.*..to do it....none of which I have
> 
> I imagine the bitework would be the most difficult area, could be wrong



The bolded part is essential. Could work if you're not too demanding and have a very will to please type sporty dog


----------



## Timothy Saunders

I have a young dog 9mos who I thought this might be possible until the other day. He wanted the decoy and decided to get some of me so I would let him go . their started the compulsion. this dog has never had a prong collar on and only wears the ecollar sometime to get him used to it.


----------



## Ashley Campbell

Granted I'm not a great trainer, probably not even marginally good by most standards, but I know with my dogs, the whole PR training doesn't mean jack to them, at least with food.
They both look at me like "F you crazy lady, give me a treat" or go off and do their own thing. When they learned that something not so good was going to happen if they ignored me, attention spans got a lot better. 
So for now we have a mix, something good = toy, something not so good or obnoxious = punishment. Punishment varies on the dog, my bitch takes a stern "NO" like a bullet to the chest, my male gets physical leash correction because he could give a damn less about "no".
Harsh corrections are reserved for extreme screw ups. Example, I was trimming his nails the other day and he turned around and chomped down on my free arm, reason? No clue, he wasn't quicked or anything. He got a verbal correction of "Oh you motherf***er" and a swift punch upside the head for that. 

So long story short, for my dogs, pure PR training doesn't fly at all. They are biddable and willing to please for the most part, but occasionally get a bug up their butt and need a reminder.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Kat LaPlante said:


> Has anyone on the forum successfully trained and titled a working dog using only motivational means and never even an ounce of cumpulsion? Is this even possible?


I suppose anything is possible...but im thinking it will depend on the dog and on how much you are willing to give away to actualy train the dog using this method...and how long your patience runs...

I think it would only work if you are willing to offer up a hell of a lot of time...and then ofcourse you should be willing to settle in some areas...by settling i mean that you might not get the quality of work from the dog that you would normaly work for or obtain from a dog...this all to avoid compulsion....so he wouldnt work to his optimal ability...and ofcourse dogs would have to live to be 25 since im pretty sure thats how long it would take to use this method and get any sort of satisfactory result....and im not even talking good or great result but just passable...and im not even starting to think about the dogs that have more of an edge and will not perform at all using motivation

to be honest if that would ever happen id stop training dogs all together....


----------



## maggie fraser

_to be honest if that would ever happen id stop training dogs all together...._

That's a pretty fixed view Alice. There are folks who have gone on to schH 3 with motivational methods, on this forum too and still alive with the same dog as I believe.

I think much depends on your motivation at the end of the day, there are those who do stuff with their dog because it is their hobby and they have the time to spend (and knowledge) to enjoy it, whilst there are others whose environment is more commercial or ambitious, just my thoughts.

In addition, is there such as thing as purely motivational, compulsion can take many forms can't it, it's not always force and bully for example, laying your hand and pushing a dogs rump to guide into a sit is still technically compulsion.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

maggie fraser said:


> _to be honest if that would ever happen id stop training dogs all together...._
> 
> That's a pretty fixed view Alice. There are folks who have gone on to schH 3 with motivational methods, on this forum too and still alive with the same dog as I believe.
> 
> I think much depends on your motivation at the end of the day, there are those who do stuff with their dog because it is their hobby and they have the time to spend (and knowledge) to enjoy it, whilst there are others whose environment is more commercial or ambitious, just my thoughts.
> 
> In addition, is there such as thing as purely motivational, compulsion can take many forms can't it, it's not always force and bully for example, laying your hand and pushing a dogs rump to guide into a sit is still technically compulsion.


Yup pretty fixed view i know but theres a reason i have such a fixed view to start with...

everything doing is worth doing right! i do not believe in training a dog halfway and then settling for a passable result at best....If i train a dog i want to see the dog achieve his very best and this will mean compulsion at some point...I am not willing to settle just to avoid using compulsion in some way or other...granted not all dogs are the same but my experiance is that every dog at some point will need some form of complusion in either minute to small amounts to large amounts depending on the dog....


----------



## maggie fraser

he he I think we need to agree on what or at least the level of compulsion the op refers to. Mainly motivational but with lesser amounts of compulsion and motivational/positive methods being the focus ?


----------



## Christopher Smith

How do you confirm that the person uses no compulsion anyway? Every single person I know that says that they are not using compulsion Is using compulsion. They are not putting a pinch collar or e-collar on the dog, but they are still using compulsion.

Last year I was training at a local club. There is a little cabal of women there that think of themselves as "behaviorist". I'm sure you guys know the type. None have titled dogs, but they think/thought that they could reinvent the sport. One of the these chicks (let's call her Meg from Family Guy) gave me a speech about how a SCH3 dog handler that still uses an e-collar is using a crutch and is lazy. 30 minutes later I walked out to see her smashing her dogs head in the car door! When I asked Meg WTF she was doing she told me that she was "teaching him not to come out of the car". :-o When I called bullshit on her non-compulsive methods she told me it's different because she is doing "single event learning". So Meg is still running around saying that she dosen't use compulsion.

There are also people that claim no compulsion but mentally and emotionally beat the shit out of the dog. To me, most dogs would much rather have a quick emotionless correction on the collar.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

maggie fraser said:


> he he I think we need to agree on what or at least the level of compulsion the op refers to.Mainly motivational but with lesser amounts of compulsion and motivational/positive methods being the focus ?


It all depends on what the view of compulsion is to start with...my understanding of compulsion could be a totaly different thing to what you read into the very same thing....i will give you this concesion tho...depending on the dog, the sports or work it participates in...it MIGHT work....MIGHT being the keyword here...in my case ? not happening...not being stubborn here but i am not willing to make any concesions when it comes to bringing out of a dog the very best it can be....and then im not even talking about the "**** you boss" dogs


----------



## maggie fraser

Christopher Smith said:


> How do you confirm that the person uses no compulsion anyway? Every single person I know that says that they are not using compulsion Is using compulsion. They are not putting a pinch collar or e-collar on the dog, but they are still using compulsion.
> 
> Last year I was training at a local club. There is a little cabal of women there that think of themselves as "behaviorist". I'm sure you guys know the type. None have titled dogs, but they think/thought that they could reinvent the sport. One of the these chicks (let's call her Meg from Family Guy) gave me a speech about how a SCH3 dog handler that still uses an e-collar is using a crutch and is lazy. 30 minutes later I walked out to see her smashing her dogs head in the car door! When I asked Meg WTF she was doing she told me that she was "teaching him not to come out of the car". :-o When I called bullshit on her non-compulsive methods she told me it's different because she is doing "single event learning". So Meg is still running around saying that she dosen't use compulsion.
> 
> *There are also people that claim no compulsion but mentally and emotionally beat the shit out of the dog. To me, most dogs would much rather have a quick emotionless correction on the collar.*


 
Yes, you're absolutlely right, you do not have to be physical to be using compulsion that's why I think the boundaries of compulsion need to be addressed a little better for a more open discussion.


----------



## Al Curbow

Purely motivational? That would mean not witholding anything too right? Purely motivational is impossible. As soon as you say " game over you're not complying" and stop playing with the dog, that throws the purely motivational thing out the window, that's a form of correction.


----------



## ann schnerre

bob scott's GSD Thunder, Sch3. all motivtional, no compulsion. right dog, right trainer.


----------



## Mary Buck

Doug Humphrey said:


> I believe it was Sue Barwig that wrote a book on positive only obedience as it related to Schutzhund. go with that decision.


Sheila Booth Purely Positive Training 

I don't know of a single competitive Ob dog that is successful (OTCH NOI successful) that you can say that about. At some point in the training the dog will make a mistake and you will have to tell it that it is wrong. Not sure I define that as compulsion though. 

And yes...I have been around alot of Purely Positive trainers that seem to let that concept slip when ol Sparky takes off after a cat or dashes through a door...so hard to whip that clicker out when your arm is being yanked from its socket. 

Oh that's right...they have a "relationship" and their dog would never act like a dog.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Several speaking up for Bob but Bob is being pretty quiet. Seems Bob said Thunder was "almost" all motivational. Where are you Bob?


----------



## Mike Scheiber

To much left on the table unless its a total crapper.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

It is a wonderful "theory" but that is all it is for the dog sports involving bite work for sure.


----------



## mike suttle

I am a firm believer that all training is motivational. Making the pain go away is the highest form of motivation.:grin:


----------



## Bob Scott

Compulsion for me is physical correction. I have no problems with loss of reward, verbal "No", "AAAHHH", etc but no physical correction. Loss of reward to a high drive dog can be as bad or worse then physical correction.
I also believe why pick a fight with a dog that likes to fight! That's a leadership issue with 99% of the dogs out there.
Thunder has his SCHIII, CDX, HT, TT, CGC with no PHYSICAL corrections. That's including bite work in Schutzhund!
When I get off my lazy ass he will get his UD and more herding titles.
I will get physical for manners but it's never more then a neck scruff or, at best, grabbing them by the jowls and getting in their face.
My downside is a temper. I've lost it and it does nothing but set back any sensible training. 
I will forever used motivational training but will also have no problems with a physical correction if needed. 
I just haven't needed it in the past 6+ yrs with any of my dogs. 
My former club uses no physical correction and they have titled three Sch IIIs a number of IIs and many BHs in a period of 5-6 yrs. There are pictures and video at www.rwdc.org


----------



## Adi Ibrahimbegovic

Kat LaPlante said:


> Has anyone on the forum successfully trained and titled a working dog using only motivational means and never even an ounce of cumpulsion? Is this even possible?


Titled in what? Schutzhund? KNPV? Ring? Agility? Herding? Please be more specific.


----------



## Jo Radley

Bob Scott said:


> Compulsion for me is physical correction. I have no problems with loss of reward, verbal "No", "AAAHHH", etc but no physical correction. Loss of reward to a high drive dog can be as bad or worse then physical correction.
> I also believe why pick a fight with a dog that likes to fight! That's a leadership issue with 99% of the dogs out there.
> Thunder has his SCHIII, CDX, HT, TT, CGC with no PHYSICAL corrections. That's including bite work in Schutzhund!
> When I get off my lazy ass he will get his UD and more herding titles.
> I will get physical for manners but it's never more then a neck scruff or, at best, grabbing them by the jowls and getting in their face.
> My downside is a temper. I've lost it and it does nothing but set back any sensible training.
> I will forever used motivational training but will also have no problems with a physical correction if needed.
> I just haven't needed it in the past 6+ yrs with any of my dogs.
> My former club uses no physical correction and they have titled three Sch IIIs a number of IIs and many BHs in a period of 5-6 yrs. There are pictures and video at www.rwdc.org


Good on you Bob!

I think people confuse teaching exercises positively with living with a dog and creating boundaries. The first can be done without positive punishment ie adding something unpleasant. Generally you may need to use negative punishment ie withdrawing / withholding a reward. Food isn't an appropriate reward for most dogs in bitework. You can use it to help lower the drive, but the best reward is the bite itself whether on a sleeve or toy. 

It does take more time and effort to train this way but the good thing about it is that you develop as a trainer and learn to chunk exercises down and teach in small stages. I am an advocate of positive training where possible, but recognise that some dogs (especially high drive ones) need boundaries too. The best place to teach boundaries is away from the exercises you want him or her to perform. The trouble is in most cases the dogs are smarter than the humans and so we use force to stop them out smarting us. If you train with physical punishment / e-collar what do you do when you come up against a dog that has enough fight to match you every time? Oh - don't tell me that isn't possible - there are a few about :lol:


----------



## Jo Radley

Brilliant video at the bottom of the page: www.rwdc.org

Lovely happy, relaxed dogs working well.

Well done all at Riverfront


----------



## Ian Forbes

maggie fraser said:


> _to be honest if that would ever happen id stop training dogs all together...._
> 
> That's a pretty fixed view Alice. There are folks who have gone on to schH 3 with motivational methods, on this forum too and still alive with the same dog as I believe.
> 
> I think much depends on your motivation at the end of the day, there are those who do stuff with their dog because it is their hobby and they have the time to spend (and knowledge) to enjoy it, whilst there are others whose environment is more commercial or ambitious, just my thoughts.
> 
> *In addition, is there such as thing as purely motivational, compulsion can take many forms can't it, it's not always force and bully for example, laying your hand and pushing a dogs rump to guide into a sit is still technically compulsion*.


IMO all good training is motivational. It motivates the dog to do the right thing and not to do the wrong thing.

By definition it is impossible to train without punishment. Even those who claim to use purely positive methods are using aversives (extinction and withholding rewards). If these did not punish the undesired behaviours, then they would not be able to train a dog. Whether these 'positive' methods are any knder/fairer/more effective is very much a matter of opinion.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Kat LaPlante said:


> Has anyone on the forum successfully trained and titled a working dog using only motivational means and never even an ounce of cumpulsion? Is this even possible?


Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
of course a good understanding of the method is a must.


----------



## Kate Kueper

I really don't want to get into a discussion on verbage. Since the questions was has anyone trained using motivational, not what is motivatial training, I am going to assume most people are referring to positive reinforcement when they talk about motivational training. That being said, my male GSD, Mike, has his TT, CGC, CD and Sch 3 using all positive reinforcement. He achieved high in tracking twice and high in protection once. For his Sch3, he missed high in trial by 1 point. He has also scored in the 90s in protection in all his competitions. This all with no physical corrections. The only "punishment" Mike ever got is loss of reward.

I also know Shade Whitesel in Washington who trains purely positivly. Shade and her dog Reiki have a CD, Sch 3 and FR1, using all positive reinforcement. In addition to winning the Mal Championship for his Sch 1 in 2008 and the DVG Nationals Sch 2 in 2009, they took 5th in the AWDF Nationals in spring of 2010.

Kate Kueper


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I'd like to say that it is possible to train a dog, especially in bite sports, without compulsion.

Unluckily, I cannot do that.

My dogs have always looked for a way to outwit me in protection!! If they hadn't, I would say they were flat!

There maybe a way. But just tell me how to train the dog absolutely motivationally, so that he heels on to the field and around the helper without trying to have a bite!!

I'm serious and I would like to have *exact* instructions


----------



## David Frost

From my experience, if the bite work can be taught using nothing but positive reinforcement, the dog is only doing an obedience exercise that includes hanging on. It certainly isn't "bite work". 

DFrost


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Well, Davd, that is one answer to my question ha ha ha!!


----------



## Kat LaPlante

Gillian Schuler said:


> OP!! Tell me first what you think compulsion is!
> 
> I do a lot of motivational training as far as it goes! However, when there is a much, much, greater distraction than a football, tug lying on the fiedl during obedience, namely the helper in the hide, then I could hold sausage in front of my dog, he wouldn't be interested and over short or long, "compulsion" comes into the "game".
> 
> It's not a bad thing "compulsion" - sometimes a "no" is enough - sometimes it's not - it depends. I see handlers hold their dogs back by the collar to make sure they race with vigour to the helper. I make mine sit quietly by my side with eye contact and only then do I release him to go.
> 
> I think "compulsion haters" have to step down a bit. We haven't got children but if we had and if they didn't feel like going to school one morning - I guess I'd use "compulsion" and not "friendly persuasion".
> 
> If you all think about it, there is "compulsion" in everything we do with the dog together, starting with the first day he enters the holy house and wants to throw his weight about! The non-compulsive handlers let him be but "pay up" comes later. The others set him his limits "compulsion" and have less trouble later.


Gillian, when I refer to compulsion I am referring to physical; prong, choke, etc. although I know that the aspect of compulsion is broad lets limit it to a harder drivey dog, one that would likely not care about verbal assaults such as a nasty sounding "NO" etc. 

I am not opposed to compulsion at all, not for dogs, not for people and not for my children. I wanted to know if it is possible to take a dog all the way to competition and win with no physical compulsion techniques, and I am interested in hearing from the forum aka real life vs. books that someones is selling.

The reason I bring this up is due to the fact I am working with my pup, although she is on a long line a lot for training she is 100% responsive to clicker and treats as long as I keep my sessions within 8-10 mins. I am beginning to wonder how long this will last as long as I keep it interesting combined with training only when she is successfully in a heightenend state....


----------



## Candy Eggert

David Frost said:


> From my experience, if the bite work can be taught using nothing but positive reinforcement, the dog is only doing an obedience exercise that includes hanging on. It certainly isn't "bite work".
> 
> DFrost


There it is in a nutshell \\/

I'm sending you vibes David to raise that hand  Are you feeling it?! LOL Great tag line!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Kat, 

I don't think you can "think beforehand" with a dog. I think you have to apply force as it becomes necessary and force need not be cruel but there is a tendence to correct the dog "lightly" and this is a never-ending correction.

If it is necessary to correct the dog then do it forcefully so that he understands that this is a no-go and obeys.

There is a German expression "Ein Ende ohne Schrecken" oder ein "Schrecken ohne Ende".


----------



## Kat LaPlante

maggie fraser said:


> Yes, you're absolutlely right, you do not have to be physical to be using compulsion that's why I think the boundaries of compulsion need to be addressed a little better for a more open discussion.


in reference to my OP, lets define compulsion as physical only, ALL types of physical, no grey areas. Lets also assume the dog is on the harder side and mental/emotional corrections have little effect.


----------



## Kat LaPlante

Adi Ibrahimbegovic said:


> Titled in what? Schutzhund? KNPV? Ring? Agility? Herding? Please be more specific.


Anything, protection, hearding, OB, any of it.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Kat, what would you consider "emotional corrections"?


----------



## Kat LaPlante

Gillian Schuler said:


> Kat, what would you consider "emotional corrections"?


Withholding reward, nasty "NO"'s, ending sessions due to non response or wrong response, it is my easy way of making a blanket category for anything that is something other than physical corrections. 

I am unsure about whether or not I personally would consider a correction from an ecollar to be physical as there is no physical link from handler to dog.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

One thing I've seen many of the "no compulsion" trainers talk about is that they just use lack or reward as the correction, many times coupled with taking the dog off the field and putting them back into their crate for a short period of time.

What I want to know is how you get the dog off the field? If you are telling the dog "no", then dragging him off the field to his crate for a "time out", that is a form of compulsion. Or when you tell the dog "no" and take it off the field is it happily heeling along with you then going into it's crate when told?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Kat, I don't use an e-collar as it is forbidden in Switzerland but somehow "nasty" no's have me thinking!!!

No is no and yes is yes. It is "nearly" possible to get a dog to a certain stage with these commands. but "nasty" nos's are emotional and the dog picks up on this and is less likely to obey, i.e. he senses the "weakness" of the handler.

Short, clipped commands fully without emotion are the answer to getting the dog to obey.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Kadi Thingvall said:


> One thing I've seen many of the "no compulsion" trainers talk about is that they just use lack or reward as the correction, many times coupled with taking the dog off the field and putting them back into their crate for a short period of time.
> 
> What I want to know is how you get the dog off the field? If you are telling the dog "no", then dragging him off the field to his crate for a "time out", that is a form of compulsion. Or when you tell the dog "no" and take it off the field is it happily heeling along with you then going into it's crate when told?


 
Good question


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I can relate this. 

I come on to field, dog more or less on me focus!!! I send him to blind 1, he goes, I call him here, he comes and sits in front of me, I send him to hide 2, he goes, he comes to heel when I call - he comes out with me and downs and then attacks helper and then..........

Alles Scheisse!!!

The dog doesn't heel as he should, always the helper in sight - when I heel up to the point when he has to go to "long fleet", it looks like something dumb, dumb, dumb.

Tell me what I should do without using compulsion?????


----------



## Christopher Smith

Kadi Thingvall said:


> One thing I've seen many of the "no compulsion" trainers talk about is that they just use lack or reward as the correction, many times coupled with taking the dog off the field and putting them back into their crate for a short period of time.
> 
> What I want to know is how you get the dog off the field? If you are telling the dog "no", then dragging him off the field to his crate for a "time out", that is a form of compulsion. Or when you tell the dog "no" and take it off the field is it happily heeling along with you then going into it's crate when told?


One of the Cabal of Emotional "Behaviorist", that I spoke about above, used to carry her 65lb+ Malinois off of the field. For instance, if the dog would not out the sleeve when it was slipped, she would try to ask him a few times to out, get exasperated and *carry him off the field.* 

Then there was a second show at the truck with the dog, still not outing, and her trying to wait him out.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

In my opinion was too late, whatever she did!

Just read it again, saw how ludicrous th whole action was!!!


----------



## Ian Forbes

Kate Kueper said:


> I really don't want to get into a discussion on verbage. Since the questions was has anyone trained using motivational, not what is motivatial training, I am going to assume most people are referring to positive reinforcement when they talk about motivational training. That being said, my male GSD, Mike, has his TT, CGC, CD and Sch 3 using all positive reinforcement.


Not strictly true. You are also using negative punishment and extinction (both of which can be aversive or else they would not work).



> He achieved high in tracking twice and high in protection once. For his Sch3, he missed high in trial by 1 point. He has also scored in the 90s in protection in all his competitions. This all with no physical corrections. *The only "punishment" Mike ever got is loss of reward*.


That's great, but it was punishment, so he obviously found it aversive. I'm not sure that this means it is somehow 'better' than using physical aversives.



> I also know Shade Whitesel in Washington who trains *purely positivly*. Shade and her dog Reiki have a CD, Sch 3 and FR1, using all positive reinforcement. In addition to winning the Mal Championship for his Sch 1 in 2008 and the DVG Nationals Sch 2 in 2009, they took 5th in the AWDF Nationals in spring of 2010.
> 
> Kate Kueper


As stated before, all training involves punishment. I'm not sure that we can state that psychological punishment (witholding of reward) is somehow better than physical punishment.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
> of course a good understanding of the method is a must.


To say that any one method will work with all dogs for all things in all environments is at best a guess and at worst bullshit. :-D


----------



## David Frost

Ian Forbes said:


> To say that any one method will work with all dogs for all things in all environments is at best a guess and at worst bullshit. :-D


I think you are being too kind. To say that any one method will work with all dogs for all things in all environments is ignorance and shows a total lack of experience. I refuse to say "I've seen it all". I have to tell ya though, folks have to work at showing me something I haven't seen (in dog training). 

DFrost


----------



## Ian Forbes

Gillian Schuler said:


> I can relate this.
> 
> I come on to field, dog more or less on me focus!!! I send him to blind 1, he goes, I call him here, he comes and sits in front of me, I send him to hide 2, he goes, he comes to heel when I call - he comes out with me and downs and then attacks helper and then..........
> 
> Alles Scheisse!!!
> 
> The dog doesn't heel as he should, always the helper in sight - when I heel up to the point when he has to go to "long fleet", it looks like something dumb, dumb, dumb.
> 
> Tell me what I should do without using compulsion?????


The way that I have seen Ismail de Vos (and others) do this is for the helper to either drop the sleeve or go back out of sight again. The helper then only picks up the sleeve/comes into view again when obedience is correct.

Obviously this can take some time and requires plenty of cooperation between the helper and the handler and you may have to be prepared for several sessions where the dog does not get another bite.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Ian Forbes said:


> Obviously this can take some time and requires plenty of cooperation between the helper and the handler and....


the dog has to see protection as a game.

This is the worst type of bullshit to come into "protection" training. It just makes dogs weak.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Christopher Smith said:


> the dog has to see protection as a game.


Yep. It won't work for all dogs....


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I wish mine did!!!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Ian Forbes said:


> The way that I have seen Ismail de Vos (and others) do this is for the helper to either drop the sleeve or go back out of sight again. The helper then only picks up the sleeve/comes into view again when obedience is correct.
> 
> Obviously this can take some time and requires plenty of cooperation between the helper and the handler and you may have to be prepared for several sessions where the dog does not get another bite.


Must try this, thankis!


----------



## Ian Forbes

Christopher Smith said:


> This is the worst type of bullshit to come into "protection" training. It just makes dogs weak.


Not necessarily. It's just one way of trying to resolve one issue.

I know for a fact that Ismail de Vos has had some dogs that were definitely not weak - he won the Belgian Sch Alll Breeds Championship with a Rottweiler in 1998.


----------



## Jo Radley

David Frost said:


> From my experience, if the bite work can be taught using nothing but positive reinforcement, the dog is only doing an obedience exercise that includes hanging on. It certainly isn't "bite work".
> 
> DFrost


That would depend on the dog A high drive, high fight dog needs no encouragement to engage


----------



## Kate Kueper

Ian Forbes said:


> Not strictly true. You are also using negative punishment and extinction (both of which can be aversive or else they would not work).
> 
> 
> 
> That's great, but it was punishment, so he obviously found it aversive. I'm not sure that this means it is somehow 'better' than using physical aversives.
> 
> 
> 
> As stated before, all training involves punishment. I'm not sure that we can state that psychological punishment (witholding of reward) is somehow better than physical punishment.


I really hesitated to even post on this topic because I knew what it would become. You are obviously driven to argue with/disbelieve/disagree with Motivational Training. You can do whatever dance you want to redefine the terms, but it is what it is and it does work.

I have no intention on getting into a discussion on training methods. You train how you want and I will train how I want. However, please stop trying to nulify the success of Operant Conditioning because you don't understand it.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I think that is what David Frost is trying to express???


----------



## Bob Scott

David Frost said:


> From my experience, if the bite work can be taught using nothing but positive reinforcement, the dog is only doing an obedience exercise that includes hanging on. It certainly isn't "bite work".
> 
> DFrost



That's an excellent point David. Again, it's how you define positive. 
With protection work the decoy still puts pressure on the dog when the dog is ready. That part is not the handlers job.
Operant and classical conditioning would more describe what RWDC does. I agree with everyone that motivational or entirely positive are overworked words.
Again, MY definition of compulsion is no physical correction. 
How the dog bites is about the dog and decoy. Lack of physical pressure from the handler doesn't have to be a part of it.
Obedience excercise? To a point in that the dog must perform what the handler wants in order to get the bite. What happens when he gets that bite can be a game or a fight. That's the dog and decoy. 
There were/are dogs at RWDC that play the game and a few that want to kick ass. Both have to earn the right with good obedience. 
The game player may never be a serious/real dog but that doesn't mean the dog that wants to kick ass is playing a game. 
Good or bad, Schutzhund is no longer a test for working dogs. It can be, but for the most part it's just another bite sport. The reality of the bite work is still a part of the dog's mentality and the decoys ability to bring out what the dog has. Game or fight.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: However, please stop trying to nulify the success of Operant Conditioning because you don't understand it.

What success ? Who is having all this success ? What are you currently doing with your dog ??

It is cute to listen to you talk, but who are you ? Where are all these people doing this positive crap ?

I know ONE person that does the positive crap, and they are done. The dog will not listen.

Most new people, and lets face it, pretty much everyone on the board, is just not good enough to train all positive with any sort of success.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Bob,

I can't see that the decoy determines whether the "bite" should be game or fight!

The type of dog determines this and the type of dog, "play" or "fight" is the type of dog that the handler has to adjust to and the helper!!!

In our back of the woods in little old Switzerland, the fight overweighs the game, normallly!!!


----------



## Bob Scott

Gillian Schuler said:


> Bbo,
> 
> I can't see that the decoy determines whether the "bite" should be game or fight!
> 
> The type of dog determines this and the type of dog, "play" or "fight" is the type of dog that the handler has to adjust to and the helper!!!
> 
> In our back of the woods in little Switzerland, the fight overwighs the game.


I said the dog AND the decoy determines the play or fight. 
The type of dog is only as good as what the decoy brings out of it. Many good dogs are only in prey because of the decoy work. Many ok dogs look great because of the decoy work. 
Both dog and decoy are need to bring out whatever the dog has. 
I don't think either type of dog need pressure from the handler to do what they do.
Example in bite work
YOu have a strong dog that wants to fight. if that dog is clearheaded at all it wont take a rocket scientist (words of my former TD) for that dog to learn he needs a bit of control to get the bite. There is NO higher reward for a strong, serious dog then the bite. Why would he NOT do what you ask if he knows his compliance will bring that reward? 
Again, IMHO, this goes for 99% of the dogs out there. 
I would put dogs such as Dick and Selena's and Mike Suttles in this 1% but they are far from the norm.
Motor cycle gangs have what they call the 1%ers. These are the seriously bad bikers that have no qualms killing anyone that looks crosseyed at them. The average biker gang is a lot of wannabys that get off on their "Image" of being tough.
I see the same thing in "most" bite dogs. Not all! 
I agree that fight SHOULD outweigh the game. Unfortunately, for the most part, it's still all a game.


----------



## Jim Nash

David Frost said:


> I think you are being too kind. To say that any one method will work with all dogs for all things in all environments is ignorance and *shows a total lack of experience*. I refuse to say "I've seen it all". I have to tell ya though, folks have to work at showing me something I haven't seen (in dog training).
> 
> DFrost


Amen ! There are some internet trainers that are very good at making " thier " one way of training , being the end all be all of training for all dogs . All I can think reading such things are , this guy hasn't trained very many dogs .


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Kat LaPlante said:


> Withholding reward, nasty "NO"'s, ending sessions due to non response or wrong response, it is my easy way of making a blanket category for anything that is something other than physical corrections.
> 
> *I am unsure about whether or not I personally would consider a correction from an ecollar to be physical as there is no physical link from handler to dog.*


even tho theres no physical contact from dog to trainer in your view, the dog will sure percieve it as physical in my estimation...and appart from that im pretty sure that most dogs know that when they are wearing an Ecollar that its the owner thats correcting them.....not all dogs but some just are that smart or the owner that stupid....


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
> of course a good understanding of the method is a must.


Im sorry but what a load of BS that statement is! I have all kinds of dogs in my 20 years, some needed the gentle touch, some needed more forcefull persuasion and some were downright total utter bastards...ive trained each and every one according to what they showed me that they needed...people forget that a dog will show you how it will work best for you...one method will not work for all dogs....to say that every shape. size, and breed of dog will respond to this is a mighty big statement and in my eyes it comes from someone who hasnt had a hell of a lot of experiance with dogs to begin with...every dog needs its own individual form of treatment and if theres one thing i do know for sure it is this: every time i trained a dog i learned something new...i dont thing i will ever stop learning and that the training and sports that i am involved in is like a work in progress and ever evolving...

Every new dog means you are problems...you simply can not state that since you did it right once with one dog that it will work for you again with the next dog...

Sorry Lynda but you are so wrong here its not even funny !


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Kate Kueper said:


> I really hesitated to even post on this topic because I knew what it would become. You are obviously driven to argue with/disbelieve/disagree with Motivational Training. You can do whatever dance you want to redefine the terms, but it is what it is and it does work.
> 
> I have no intention on getting into a discussion on training methods. You train how you want and I will train how I want. However, please stop trying to nulify the success of Operant Conditioning because you don't understand it.


Isnt this open for discusion tho ? i thought that was why the topic was opened to begin with, sharing views and to agree or disagree with one another...

regardless if i agree with ian or not, he has a right to make his comments as do you...its your right to reply to these comments as you see fit...to accuse of nulifying the success is hardly the way to go about proving your view.....

no offence Kate !


----------



## Kate Kueper

No offense taken Alice. I only joined this thread to say that yes there have been dogs trained successfully using Operant Conditioning, as that was what the OP asked

Maybe I should have worded my reply differently to say "I have no intention of arguing about training methods", since that is normally what occurs here. I have no problem with an open, honest and informed discussion. However it seems whenever training methods come up, it becomes an argumentative insult fest and I really have no desire to join in.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Kate Kueper said:


> No offense taken Alice. I only joined this thread to say that yes there have been dogs trained successfully using Operant Conditioning, as that was what the OP asked
> 
> Maybe I should have worded my reply differently to say "I have no intention of arguing about training methods", since that is normally what occurs here. I have no problem with an open, honest and informed discussion. However it seems whenever training methods come up, it becomes an argumentative insult fest and I really have no desire to join in.


Yup...in my short time here "been there done that " 

lets hope this one wont turn into one of those huh


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

While I am a strong believer in using positive reinforcement to TEACH a behavior, operant conditioning includes negative and positive punishment whether you choose to use them or not. I have trained one dog that does not have what I call "because I say so button." I can tell you that the non reward marker [NRM] is not adversive to him at all. It simply means "try again." I tried telling him "no" one day as corrective with lowering my voice and what not. It had no meaning whatsoever to him. He will always default to the behaviors I taught him with positive reinforcement and his mindset is to see which one of them is what I want if he is confused. 

My bouvier almost outsmarted the shaping process on the retrieve. She KNEW what I wanted and actually chose a different route but based on my criteria forthe lesson she could chose a different route and still get rewarded. That's fine, the next day I changed the criteria where all she had left was do what I wanted. It was hilarious---the deep growl in frustration as she did it. But I will say going through the process broke down her resistance. She had been trained with a because I say so button and I don't have to physically correct a dog and they don't wear collars. The relationship is mental. What the work did for her was change her attitude from I have to--TO--I want to. She was damn near flawless in her first trial and on stock she previously considered dinner. My bouv is biddable--at least more so than what my corgi is and true to what a lady in the Netherlands told me--what you put in a bouv they keep their life long. Training with positive reinforcement has given me a way to deal with capping and release and she has responded very well to that. She's a load and explode type of dog and until I figured out how to work marker/release with that, we were kinda stalled. Conflict with the handler is HUGE in dog training. Using the positive reinforcement to teach a behavior gets rid of a lot of stress and conflict in the learning phase and unless you have a mental delinquent, you really don't have to take it to a correction phase. With mostly what I deal with, its the land of instinct and true drive---not trying to get it and maintain it for an artificial setting. I don't want to take away the instinct part of it and I need to be in their heads when they are in instinct/drive. This is a better of doing that for me. 

My third dog is what I refer to as a union employee. She is textbook operant conditioning and how it works. There is no way in the world she would have the skills she has now if I had insisted on old school training. In looking at negative punishment, I swear the stock dogs would rather take a wack than you say game over, no more stock for the day. So I gave her a job to do and she was in the airhead clueless mode. So being at home, I said, "that'll do" i.e. game over. The look on her face was priceless--"you can't mean it." I went in the house and left her outside. The next day, we went out, I opened the gate. She had them out and across the yard into the pen with a blink of an eye. Mark/Reward. As much as I hate it and as cute as she is, Khaldi will flip her paw at me. She is beyond the learning phase on stock pretty much. We've gone through intermittent reinforcements and such. She does have a "what's in it for me" attitude where Khira-bouv really doesn't operate that way. Using the game over approach is highly effective for her. Physical correction would get you absolutely nothing. 

What I hate is that people are so caught up on purely positive, the usefulness of the system to teach and establish consistent performance is lost. A lot of times [not all], when its not working is because people fail to realize that dogs are HIGHLY specific. As a rule they do not generalize. This is the big difference between Khaldi and Khira. Khira is verbal and a generalist. Khaldi is visual and is specific to the spot on the field where you trained it. Khira has an emotional load/explode frustration button. Khaldi does not. You have to make sure you have gone through the training [with the reinforcement system] for what they are truly going to see in the work or on the trial field and for some dogs that even means the nervy imposter handler at the post. If you have truly have worked the dog through the system for all levels of distraction and including how are we going to handle if it goes wrong, and doggie is flipping his paw, you might have to say "you know what, I buy the dog food." 

People get caught up in religious absolutes. Ya know what, dogs are not lab rats. As Alice points out, each dog is different. My first bouv Thor [now 14 1/2] is highly dominant. When he decided to challenge and had his teeth wrapped around hubby's arm, it wasn't going to be about cookies, extinction, etc. We got him over that in a session and never had to revisit it again. In selecting Khira, I came down the dominance scale but it seems I traded for high prey/fight. So its not with me but the stock had better watch out. I have to be in her head and able to get into her head when she checks out. One of the problems with the compulsion approach is that a bouv or otherwise hard dog that checks out into fight or prey gaga land, doesn't feel much. I've watched my own go through chain link and glass and known others to run through the highest setting on an e collar on stock. On stock for Khira, most of the time, external rewards really aren't that meaningful. For Khaldi they are. Yet managing Khira through markers with the implicit release is effective. With each release, she can cap herself a little longer. I can't tell you how mind boggling intelligent this dog is so I have to stay on my toes and I've had some rocket science GSDs. NONE of my dogs are the same and I can't train them the same. I tried correcting Khira once when she was on stock. It amped her up so much she looked like a snapping turtle. I did find out she was clear. 

What will be interesting for me at this point is to train my next stock dog [Thunder clone] with this system from the start. You can use the other stuff to effectively stop a behavior. For ME, it really isn't all that effective for teaching a behavior especially in the context of reading/relating to another animal and maintaining a line of communication to me at the same time. 

Bottom line, you can debate until the cows come home but until you go out and work with it with your dog, you'll never know. The success of it isn't really isn't 100% objective. Its subjective to the dog's mental package and the handler's ability, like anything else I guess.

Terrasita


----------



## David Frost

Jo Radley said:


> That would depend on the dog A high drive, high fight dog needs no encouragement to engage



Not disagreeing with you. Bite work however is more than just engaging. If the dog needs encouragement to bite, in my opinion, that's the wrong dog for serious bite work. It's the "not biting until told" and the "stop biting when told" that becomes the booger bear.

DFrost


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Yeah, with my dogs, I always say there are rules of engagement. That's where the training and handling comes into play.

Terrasita


----------



## Kirstyn Kerbo

Are we talking marker training(rewarding a dog for performing a behavior, withhold or correctfor being an idiot)? Or just 100% positive(never say no)? The only reason I ask bc through al lthese pages it is getting pretty blurry.

Every dog is different. I am a big fan of, regardless of what type of training, to have your dog be your partner and do something because she/he WANTS to do it. Whatver you end up using to train, your dog should enjoy what he is doing...not just you having fun. 

I think to TEACH a dog to perform a behavior, you should use a reward based system. I don't like to correct a dog when the dog is not even sure about what the hell I want him to do. I don't ask, then correct, unless I'm pretty sure my dog gets it. either that, or practise with distractions during obedience. 

But as far as corrections are otherwise concerned? YES. 
Because you know what? It just doesn't work all the time(The whole food thing). 
EX: I tried to do marker/treat training when teaching my dog agility. At home, he is a pretty good dog to marker train. This type of training is for sure the way to go with obedience, teaching tricks, etc. 
At agility class, that went out the window. He would not respond to toys or treats. What DID he want? Either to go on the obstacles(Because obstacles=praise from me), or try to eat all the small dogs in the class. I went with the first bc it was the only one workable...LOL...so I just used that as a reward. Not as a marker, per say, but to keep him motivated. As for not eating other dogs? Prong collar O Worked out fine for us. correct when acting stupid. Redirect to another activity. Praise. Even got us a little trophy :-\"=D>
It kept him focused, and gave a good example to other people in the class(some of whom hated prongs) on the correct manner in which to use one. We were BOTH happy and had a lot of fun, so it was right for me. 
Idk. I hope I explained that correctly. =P~


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Alice Bezemer said:


> Im sorry but what a load of BS that statement is! I have all kinds of dogs in my 20 years, some needed the gentle touch, some needed more forcefull persuasion and some were downright total utter bastards...ive trained each and every one according to what they showed me that they needed...people forget that a dog will show you how it will work best for you...one method will not work for all dogs....to say that every shape. size, and breed of dog will respond to this is a mighty big statement and in my eyes it comes from someone who hasnt had a hell of a lot of experiance with dogs to begin with...every dog needs its own individual form of treatment and if theres one thing i do know for sure it is this: every time i trained a dog i learned something new...i dont thing i will ever stop learning and that the training and sports that i am involved in is like a work in progress and ever evolving...
> 
> Every new dog means you are *going to open a whole new box of *problems...you simply can not state that since you did it right once with one dog that it will work for you again with the next dog...
> 
> Sorry Lynda but you are so wrong here its not even funny !



sorry for the red EDIT lol....just noticed that i forgot to edit my mistake earlier....had a kind of sortof messed up thing going on up there ^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## Christopher Smith

Ian Forbes said:


> Not necessarily. It's just one way of trying to resolve one issue.
> 
> I know for a fact that Ismail de Vos has had some dogs that were definitely not weak - he won the Belgian Sch Alll Breeds Championship with a Rottweiler in 1998.


I trained with Ismail in about 2001. He was an ass kicking machine.


----------



## Michael Ellis

Just as a clarification, operant conditioning includes positive punishment and negative reinforcement, as well as positive reinforcement and negative punishment. It is a misnomer to say that reward based trainers are using operant conditioning and escape/avoidance trainers are not...they are both using operant conditioning...just different halves of the quadrant.
Michael


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Slow day at the office ?


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

I can't believe Michele Ellis is on this forum, I am like totally stoked


----------



## Tammy St. Louis

Micheal ! Micheal ! Micheal ! , ( the crowd goes WILD) ,,


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I am not going wild. Not for 6 posts. Pointing out the obvious once a year or so is not going to make me go wild. An actual discussion might. or not.


----------



## Tracey Hughes

I can’t believe 2 people in a row spelled Michael’s name wrong!

Too much thinking in dog training…just go out and do it. Your dog will let you know if your method is working or not.


----------



## mike suttle

Tracey Hughes said:


> I can’t believe 2 people in a row spelled Michael’s name wrong!
> 
> .


LOL, what is really funny is that my name is also Michael, and I did not even notice the two mispelled attempts at his name.
But since Gerry freaked out on me for spelling his country with a lowercase letter "c", I should point out that he just used a womans name to adress Michael. :razz: 
you see Gerry, accidents can happen on here with the spelling and grammer.:smile:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

BAD case of the man crush. : )


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I am not going wild. Not for 6 posts. Pointing out the obvious once a year or so is not going to make me go wild. An actual discussion might. or not.


Jeff,

Envy is such a petty emotion LOL

Michael,

Chris was all stoked at training today. We're trying some of the ideas you suggested for Flann and the other dogs


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

mike suttle said:


> you see Gerry, accidents can happen on here with the spelling and grammer.:smile:


:lol: i know what I typed. I know who Michael is and that was just a poke at people that go mental over name dropping.

I'm sure he is a fine person and wont be upset by anything I say.

pS..Grammar ??


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Michael Ellis????


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
> of course a good understanding of the method is a must.


This is a very bold statement...very bold indeed...


----------



## Joby Becker

Ian Forbes said:


> The way that I have seen Ismail de Vos (and others) do this is for the helper to either drop the sleeve or go back out of sight again. The helper then only picks up the sleeve/comes into view again when obedience is correct.
> 
> Obviously this can take some time and requires plenty of cooperation between the helper and the handler and you may have to be prepared for several sessions where the dog does not get another bite.


what if there is no sleeve?


----------



## Joby Becker

Jo Radley said:


> That would depend on the dog A high drive, high fight dog needs no encouragement to engage


I think he meant for the outs and control, not the biting...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Jeff,

Envy is such a petty emotion LOL

Yes, I am super jealous that you are the only one to ever get his ass chewed by Mike Ellis. It took what, 10 minutes ? You decided to do whatever you wanted, and he was trying to help, and you continued to do whatever you wanted. And then, the ass chewing. Hilarious.


----------



## Aamer Sachedina

Wow this thread has morphed into a direction I never quite expected.

I thought that those of us that were training in the working protection sports were beyond the point where we accepted the kool-aid that no matter what the dog thou shalt train with positive reinforcement and negative punishment only. 

I went through that period in my training career when it was in vogue and had/have the right dog for it. Never stopped using positive punishment in the form of social pressure (NO!) and was having this debate several years ago with Michael when he was up here for a seminar a few years ago when he pointed out to me that social pressure IS positive punishment. It was obvious but it didn't seem obvious to me at the time.

The extension of course is even more obvious. Different forms and intensity of positive punishment are perceived differently by different dogs depending on their sensitivity and make up.

I would argue that if you are not appropriately using positive punishment and negative reinforcement in your training program (along with positive reinforcement and negative punishment), you are needlessly trying to train your dog with 1/2 the information that you could otherwise provide it. Seems senseless but its just me.

Michael, good to see you here. Hope you are well.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: Jeff,
> 
> Envy is such a petty emotion LOL
> 
> Yes, I am super jealous that you are the only one to ever get his ass chewed by Mike Ellis. It took what, 10 minutes ? You decided to do whatever you wanted, and he was trying to help, and you continued to do whatever you wanted. And then, the ass chewing. Hilarious.


Michael has never chewed my ass (or probably anyone else) WTF are you talking about? ...............................................
never mind I don't really care. What a sad and pathetic individual you are.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Thomas Barriano said:


> What a sad and pathetic individual you are.


I'm just trying to get a feel for the rules here..

When you insult someone like that, how does that compare to calling someone a rumpranger or something similar ?? I know sad and pathetic and "gay" are by definition mutually exclusive, but they are both insults...no ?

I think we need a ruling from the Russian Judge


----------



## Bob Scott

:-k Could it be that Michael E doesn't come on because he's not interested in the back and forth bs???
Just a thought! ;-)
What amazes me is the amount of trash talk about something most have no expierience and/or lack of success with. could it be that it's being applied wrong? 
My dog is to hard
My dog is to stubborn
Mt dog is to sharp
My dog is to tough
My dog is to serious
Could be that the attempts to use it were to hard to grasp? :lol:;-)


----------



## ann schnerre

love you, bob


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

ann schnerre said:


> love you, bob


Me too, but not in a gay way O


----------



## Bob Scott

Gerry Grimwood said:


> Me too, but not in a gay way O



Dern good to know that! :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Lynda Myers

Ian Forbes said:


> To say that any one method will work with all dogs for all things in all environments is at best a guess and at worst bullshit. :-D


Having watched a whole Schutzhund club of dogs (15-20) all different breeds, ages, temperaments, drives and hardnesses trained this way. I think I am well within my assertion. Not only we're they capable of carrying out the work but they did it with style and finsse. So truly until you have actually trained a dog or dogs in this way without the help of physical restraint or enforcment you really don't have a leg to stand on.
Because you are talking about something you know nothing about or have personally experience.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I don't love you Bob. Sorry, leave the gay stuff to others. 

Thomas, what a short memory you have. You hold the record for the ONLY person ever chewed out by Mike Ellis. You can try to "forget" but that shit was funny.


----------



## Bob Scott

ann schnerre said:


> love you, bob


Thank ya mam! :wink:


----------



## Lynda Myers

Bob Scott said:


> :-k Could it be that Michael E doesn't come on because he's not interested in the back and forth bs???
> Just a thought! ;-)
> What amazes me is the amount of trash talk about something most have no expierience and/or lack of success with. could it be that it's being applied wrong?
> My dog is to hard
> My dog is to stubborn
> Mt dog is to sharp
> My dog is to tough
> My dog is to serious
> Could be that the attempts to use it were to hard to grasp? :lol:;-)


Now you said a mouthful right there!!!


----------



## Bob Scott

Jeff said:
"I don't love you Bob"

Yet another statment I'm glad to hear. :lol::wink:


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

mike suttle said:


> LOL, what is really funny is that my name is also Michael, and I did not even notice the two mispelled attempts at his name.
> But since Gerry freaked out on me for spelling his country with a lowercase letter "c", I should point out that he just used a womans name to adress Michael. :razz:
> you see Gerry, accidents can happen on here with the spelling and grammer.:smile:


Isn't this what you really meant -


WEST VIRGINIA ROCKS

canada not so much

\\/


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: 
Could it be that Michael E doesn't come on because he's not interested in the back and forth bs???

I guess you don't remember the smack down he got in the bark and hold thread. : ) All the fancy power talk. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


----------



## Bob Scott

Get that right Lee.
It's "WEST by god VIRGINIA" :grin::wink:


----------



## Bob Scott

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:
> Could it be that Michael E doesn't come on because he's not interested in the back and forth bs???
> 
> I guess you don't remember the smack down he got in the bark and hold thread. : ) All the fancy power talk. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


All in how you interpret smack down. 
I think you and I both feel pretty much the same about a  SHUDDER, SHUDDER 8-[ web site smack down. 
They just don't count for much unless you let them. 
Only good for harassing the insecure. :grin::wink:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

If only people could take a joke. Sooo much seriousness for no reason.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Lynda Myers said:


> Having watched a whole Schutzhund club of dogs (15-20) all different breeds, ages, temperaments, drives and hardnesses trained this way. I think I am well within my assertion. Not only we're they capable of carrying out the work but they did it with style and finsse.


What title level did these dogs achieve, and are any of them competing at a Regional, National, or World level?

Were all these dogs raised in this club/type of training, or were some crossed over to this style of training from a training style that included compulsion?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I think that she must train the same place that Bob did. All on home field with home helpers babycaking the dogs. Still, all bs aside, it is an accomplishment worth noting. That is a lot of patience.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Bob Scott said:


> Jeff said:
> "I don't love you Bob"
> 
> Yet another statment I'm glad to hear. :lol::wink:


Let's stay on topic here.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Actually, not all on the home field for the RWDC gang. I'm pretty sure Roger got Doc's Sch II at a reg/nat level event--different field in a different State and different helpers and at least the club trials I watched, the decoy was not a club decoy. You can train the dogs off different decoys and different fields with the method---again keep changing the criteria. Anyway, Doc is a Triton dog and I'm sure the Sch II details are on Trish' web page.


Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Let's stay on topic here.

Still desperately seeking validation I see.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Kate Kueper said:


> I really hesitated to even post on this topic because I knew what it would become. You are obviously driven to argue with/disbelieve/disagree with Motivational Training.


Not at all. I train very motivationally. I use verbal praise, toys, tugs, food rewards etc. I just don't kid myself that there is no punishment involved.



> You can do whatever dance you want to redefine the terms, but it is what it is and it does work.


Err. Please show how I have redefined the terms of punishment (positive and negative) and reinforcement (positive and negative).



> I have no intention on getting into a discussion on training methods.


Strange topic to post on then!



> You train how you want and I will train how I want.


Why thank you.



> However, please stop trying to nulify the success of Operant Conditioning because you don't understand it.


Classic straw man. How have I tried to 'nullify the success' of OC. I use all 4 quadrants of it!

Please show anything I have posted which conflicts with the definitions of OC........


----------



## Ian Forbes

Kate Kueper said:


> No offense taken Alice. I only joined this thread to say that yes there have been dogs trained successfully using Operant Conditioning, as that was what the OP asked


All I am showing is that operant conditioning contains punishment (positive and negative), reinforcement (positive and negative) and extinction. Many people wrongly think that operant conditioning somehow involves training without punishment.



> Maybe I should have worded my reply differently to say "I have no intention of arguing about training methods", since that is normally what occurs here. I have no problem with an open, honest and informed discussion. However it seems whenever training methods come up, it becomes an argumentative insult fest and I really have no desire to join in.


Some people take disagreement as a form of attack. I don't.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Joby Becker said:


> what if there is no sleeve?


I did mention going out of sight as another other option.

I guess another option would be to take the bite suit off.....:lol:

I think there are many options, the dog just has to work out that the reward (a chance to bite the crap out of someone/thing) has disappeared until the obedience/control is there.


----------



## Adi Ibrahimbegovic

Kat LaPlante said:


> Anything, protection, hearding, OB, any of it.


Ok, fair enough. I think, YES, it could be done.

What else could be done. You COULD walk or run from New York to Los Angeles. It has been done before, Forrest Gump has done it.

Or, you can get there in 5 hours in a plane enjoying your beverage of choice, a nap or in flight movie and hopping off te plane smiling.

Many things cab be done if you put your mind to it and have knowledge, patience, perseverance and stamina to pull it off.

Obviously judging by other posters, it has been done before, it is being done and it will continue being done.

Many ways to skin a cat, as the saying goes. 

For me, I always try "nice" first. If that doesn't work, then we up the ante. If it does work, I am the happiest in the world. I am "neutral" when using compulsion, meaning I take no pleasure or empathy in it, it's just another tool to reach the goal.

All this IMO, of course.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Having watched a whole Schutzhund club of dogs (15-20) all different breeds, ages, temperaments, drives and hardnesses trained this way. I think I am well within my assertion.


I don't think you are. That's a tiny number of dogs.



> Not only we're they capable of carrying out the work but they did it with style and finsse. So truly until you have actually trained a dog or dogs in this way without the help of physical restraint or enforcment you really don't have a leg to stand on.


Of course, you have no idea how I have trained dogs and what other trainers and dogs I have seen.



> Because you are talking about something you know nothing about or have personally experience.


The problem with making assumptions is that they are often wrong. :roll:


----------



## Lynda Myers

Alice Bezemer said:


> Im sorry but what a load of BS that statement is! I have all kinds of dogs in my 20 years, some needed the gentle touch, some needed more forcefull persuasion and some were downright total utter bastards...ive trained each and every one according to what they showed me that they needed...people forget that a dog will show you how it will work best for you...one method will not work for all dogs....to say that every shape. size, and breed of dog will respond to this is a mighty big statement and in my eyes it comes from someone who hasnt had a hell of a lot of experiance with dogs to begin with...every dog needs its own individual form of treatment and if theres one thing i do know for sure it is this: every time i trained a dog i learned something new...i dont thing i will ever stop learning and that the training and sports that i am involved in is like a work in progress and ever evolving...
> 
> Every new dog means you are problems...you simply can not state that since you did it right once with one dog that it will work for you again with the next dog...
> 
> Sorry Lynda but you are so wrong here its not even funny !


Oh Alice but you already have stopped learning! It happened the moment you closed your mind to the fact that others are using a method successfully that has somehow allured you and others a like. Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the theory. Despite the fact that several have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?

I also have well over 20 years training dogs and have trained more then one dog using this particular method and have been fortunately enough to witness many people train this way successfully. The difference is in past years I used to use a more traditional approach ...Koehler in fact and now have crossed over. 

The trouble is Alice and those that think like you do is your making assumptions on something you've never accomplished. Namely training a dog without the use of physical force. I have and with breeds that are notorious for being stubborn, willful and hard to train. Not with something easy like a furry who was selectively bred for working closely with man. And because of that there is a certain amount of inherited biddability that a furry/herder brings with him to the training field. 

But let me get this straight from your past posts I gathered that if someone took your props away right now today, you honestly feel like you would be unable to train up a high level competition dog? Because they took your collars away? Now that really is funny.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: 
Just because you and others have been unable to apply this theory of training in your sessions and get the desired results doesn't mean it doesn't work. It just means you are not proficient enough in the theory to get those kinds of results.

Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training 
yielded more reliable working dogs?

Another thing why is it when these types of threads come up all the nay sayers wanna jump in and trash it. I don't recall ever going on the e-collar and prong/pinch collars threads trashing them. What is it about a marker/clicker that rubs your furry the wrong way? When bless God all ya need to do is turn the dawg gone cat around.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Ian Forbes said:


> The problem with making assumptions is that they are often wrong. :roll:


Back at ya!


----------



## Martine Loots

Lynda Myers said:


> Oh Alice but you already have stopped learning! It happened the moment you closed your mind to the fact that others are using a method successfully that has somehow allured you and others a like. Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the theory. Despite the fact that several have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?


I don't think Alice doesn't "believe" you. 
Only thing is she probably is used to handling a completely other type of dog then the ones you describe and maybe is more demanding about the final result.
I also said that I think it may be done but depending on the type of dog and the result you want.

I also try the positive methods as much as possible, but with a strong dog sometimes you need to do more to achieve the result you want.
For me this means that I want the dog to work at 100% of his capacities and you'll never get this result from a strong dog with only positive methods.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Back at ya!


Please point out the assumption(s) that I made.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Oh Alice but you already have stopped learning! It happened the moment you closed your mind to the fact that others are using a method successfully that has somehow allured you and others a like.


Where did she say that nobody could use a method successfully or that it has alluded her. What she has questioned is your assertion that it can be used on all dogs, for all things.



> Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the theory. Despite the fact that several have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?


Nobody has claimed that you cannot train some dogs for some things without physical punishment (of course there is still psychological punishment and I'm not sure how that is better).

What they have questioned is your assertion that is can work for all dogs.



> I also have well over 20 years training dogs and have trained more then one dog using this particular method and have been fortunately enough to witness many people train this way successfully. The difference is in past years I used to use a more traditional approach ...Koehler in fact and now have crossed over.


I have seen some of the top clicker/marker trainers for protection work (including Ismail de Vos, Henrik Neuman etc.) and none of them have claimed that all dogs can be trained for all things in all environments without physical punishment.



> The trouble is Alice and those that think like you do is your making assumptions on something you've never accomplished. Namely training a dog without the use of physical force. I have and with breeds that are notorious for being stubborn, willful and hard to train. Not with something easy like a furry who was selectively bred for working closely with man. And because of that there is a certain amount of inherited biddability that a furry/herder brings with him to the training field.


That's great for you. However, to assume that this will work for all dogs is a stretch.



> But let me get this straight from your past posts I gathered that if someone took your props away right now today, you honestly feel like you would be unable to train up a high level competition dog? Because they took your collars away? Now that really is funny.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


Did she say that or have you inferred that?



> Just because you and others have been unable to apply this theory of training in your sessions and get the desired results doesn't mean it doesn't work. It just means you are not proficient enough in the theory to get those kinds of results.


Just because you have had some success with your dogs, does not mean that it is possible for all dogs.



> Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training
> yielded more reliable working dogs?


Are you claiming that all detection dogs are trained with no physical corrections for anything? Are you claiming that detection dogs are not washed out for issues that cannot be corrected with just negative punishment?



> Another thing why is it when these types of threads come up all the nay sayers wanna jump in and trash it. I don't recall ever going on the e-collar and prong/pinch collars threads trashing them. What is it about a marker/clicker that rubs your furry the wrong way? When bless God all ya need to do is turn the dawg gone cat around.


I use motivational methods. I may use most of the same tools and techniques as you. However, when you claim that all dogs can be trained this way......:-\"


----------



## Christopher Jones

Lynda Myers said:


> Oh Alice but you already have stopped learning! It happened the moment you closed your mind to the fact that others are using a method successfully that has somehow allured you and others a like. Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the theory. Despite the fact that several have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?
> 
> I also have well over 20 years training dogs and have trained more then one dog using this particular method and have been fortunately enough to witness many people train this way successfully. The difference is in past years I used to use a more traditional approach ...Koehler in fact and now have crossed over.
> 
> The trouble is Alice and those that think like you do is your making assumptions on something you've never accomplished. Namely training a dog without the use of physical force. I have and with breeds that are notorious for being stubborn, willful and hard to train. Not with something easy like a furry who was selectively bred for working closely with man. And because of that there is a certain amount of inherited biddability that a furry/herder brings with him to the training field.
> 
> But let me get this straight from your past posts I gathered that if someone took your props away right now today, you honestly feel like you would be unable to train up a high level competition dog? Because they took your collars away? Now that really is funny.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
> Just because you and others have been unable to apply this theory of training in your sessions and get the desired results doesn't mean it doesn't work. It just means you are not proficient enough in the theory to get those kinds of results.
> 
> Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training
> yielded more reliable working dogs?
> 
> Another thing why is it when these types of threads come up all the nay sayers wanna jump in and trash it. I don't recall ever going on the e-collar and prong/pinch collars threads trashing them. What is it about a marker/clicker that rubs your furry the wrong way? When bless God all ya need to do is turn the dawg gone cat around.


And this is exactly why I dislike the "totally positive" people. None of them have achieved anything of note, and they run around with dogs that couldnt work if they wanted to. They tend to think they are some higher being, using secret theories that the mere mortals are unable to grasp.
They are generally women who most likely put doggy coats on their dogs in winter time. 

It doesnt matter that EVERY high level competitor uses some form of compulsion, every police and military department uses some form of compulsion, and any dog worth his salt is gonna need some form of compulsion at some point, oh no, they are all just lower life forms who can come to grips with the "Theory".
I put these these "positive only" people in the same boat as religious zealots and environmatal extremists.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I don't love you Bob. Sorry, leave the gay stuff to others.
> 
> Thomas, what a short memory you have. You hold the record for the ONLY person ever chewed out by Mike Ellis. You can try to "forget" but that shit was funny.


Jeff,

Wrong again, as usual. I've had dozens of discussions with Michael about my dogs over the years I've known him and attended his seminars. NONE of these discussions has EVER been an "ass chewing" by any stretch of the imagination.
That you think it was, is sad. That you would bring it up now years later, to deflect from your obvious envy and jealousy is pathetic. I'm done with you Jeff.


----------



## Christopher Jones

Thomas Barriano said:


> Jeff,
> 
> Wrong again, as usual. I've had dozens of discussions with Michael about my dogs over the years I've known him and attended his seminars. NONE of these discussions has EVER been an "ass chewing" by any stretch of the imagination.
> That you think it was, is sad. That you would bring it up now years later, to deflect from your obvious envy and jealousy is pathetic. I'm done with you Jeff.


Arnt you guys friends?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Christopher Jones said:


> Arnt you guys friends?



Chris,

We used to be, but there is a limit to the how long you can make excuses for your "friends" bad behavior, before it's time to cut your loses and move on :-(


----------



## Joby Becker

Ian Forbes said:


> I did mention going out of sight as another other option.
> 
> I guess another option would be to take the bite suit off.....:lol:
> 
> I think there are many options, the dog just has to work out that the reward (a chance to bite the crap out of someone/thing) has disappeared until the obedience/control is there.


I gotcha, I do wait to see some stuff I want from the dog before sending her. but that usually involves correcting the dog...I know it is possible, just not sure if it possible with this dog. and I'll be damned if I am just gonna leave without getting any bites, my life would be hell during the week then


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: I'll be damned if I am just gonna leave without getting any bites

Yet another reason why most of the time when I hear some persons trained all positive I think bullshit dog.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Oh Alice but you already have stopped learning! It happened the moment you closed your mind to the fact that others are using a method successfully that has somehow allured you and others a like. Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the theory. Despite the fact that several have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?
> 
> I also have well over 20 years training dogs and have trained more then one dog using this particular method and have been fortunately enough to witness many people train this way successfully. The difference is in past years I used to use a more traditional approach ...Koehler in fact and now have crossed over.
> 
> The trouble is Alice and those that think like you do is your making assumptions on something you've never accomplished. Namely training a dog without the use of physical force. I have and with breeds that are notorious for being stubborn, willful and hard to train. Not with something easy like a furry who was selectively bred for working closely with man. And because of that there is a certain amount of inherited biddability that a furry/herder brings with him to the training field.
> 
> But let me get this straight from your past posts I gathered that if someone took your props away right now today, you honestly feel like you would be unable to train up a high level competition dog? Because they took your collars away? Now that really is funny.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
> Just because you and others have been unable to apply this theory of training in your sessions and get the desired results doesn't mean it doesn't work. It just means you are not proficient enough in the theory to get those kinds of results.
> 
> Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training
> yielded more reliable working dogs?
> 
> Another thing why is it when these types of threads come up all the nay sayers wanna jump in and trash it. I don't recall ever going on the e-collar and prong/pinch collars threads trashing them. What is it about a marker/clicker that rubs your furry the wrong way? When bless God all ya need to do is turn the dawg gone cat around.


I could be wrong here but I think the types of dogs alice works with most of the time would probably think about eating her if they never got a correction. 

I also think the EVERY DOG comment was silly...some dogs sure, every dog NO.


----------



## Joby Becker

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: I'll be damned if I am just gonna leave without getting any bites
> 
> Yet another reason why most of the time when I hear some persons trained all positive I think bullshit dog.


hey Jeff,
I didn't read the entire thread here, but you know enough about dogsports, is there anyone that you know that titled any kind of ring dog without corrections? FR Mondio? I am going out on a limb here but am assuming that no one has done BR, PSA or KNPV without them...I can see doing SCH with the right dog for it, the 3-5 bites but what about the other sports...

anyone know people in any of these sports that has done it?

How long would it take to title an average (not even an a azzhole dog) to a ring dog to a 3 without any corrective measures, how many times would one have to leave with no biting from the field?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Dogs do not live long enough to do the things you are talking about.

When I trained with Colorado Mondio, they had the positive mentality. And, I came to the conclusion along with several others, that we would need to start using alligators, as 6 years for a brevet was a bit too long. ](*,)

There was some good stuff that I learned, but I also learned that not a damn thing was happening at that club. Still have not produced a ring three, and that includes Ludo, who got there at ring two. For four years they worked on heel. Like I said, gonna have to start using alligators.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

> Originally Posted by *Lynda Myers*
> _Having watched a whole Schutzhund club of dogs (15-20) all different breeds, ages, temperaments, drives and hardnesses trained this way. I think I am well within my assertion. Not only we're they capable of carrying out the work but they did it with style and finsse._
> 
> 
> Kadi Thingvall said:
> 
> 
> 
> What title level did these dogs achieve, and are any of them competing at a Regional, National, or World level?
> 
> Were all these dogs raised in this club/type of training, or were some crossed over to this style of training from a training style that included compulsion?
Click to expand...

It sounds like 1 dog got a SchII. What titles did the other 15-20 dogs achieve? And what sort of time frame did they achieve them in? 

The concepts behind the style of training are interesting, I've used it for certain things in training. But I am still wondering just how effective it really is for an entire program. Which I believe was the OPs question.

Is there video of these dogs online anywhere?


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda....

How would you train a call-off? without correction?

I know the recall, use the tug for reward...long line it so dog automatically corrects itself (which is a correction)...but what if the dog does not recall and bites in training? how do you fix that without corrections...

I am an idiot, and can't figure that one out, can someone explain it to me?


----------



## Ian Forbes

Joby Becker said:


> I gotcha, I do wait to see some stuff I want from the dog before sending her. but that usually involves correcting the dog...*I know it is possible, just not sure if it possible with this dog. and I'll be damned if I am just gonna leave without getting any bites, my life would be hell during the week then*


I agree that not everything works for every dog.

The other thing is, *IF* it takes 4 weeks of doing it this way to get it right, is that better or worse (for the dog or the handler) than 1 week of getting a pop on a pinch/slip collar?

I train using whatever tools/methods works for me and my dog and I encourage others to use whatever works for them and theirs.


----------



## Joby Becker

Ian Forbes said:


> I agree that not everything works for every dog.
> 
> The other thing is, *IF* it takes 4 weeks of doing it this way to get it right, is that better or worse (for the dog or the handler) than 1 week of getting a pop on a pinch/slip collar?
> 
> I train using whatever tools/methods works for me and my dog and I encourage others to use whatever works for them and theirs.


not arguing just sayin...we are in agreement...

how would you train the call-off? been thinking about it, seems tricky to do without any corrections..can;t figure it out...


----------



## Ian Forbes

Joby Becker said:


> not arguing just sayin...
> 
> how would you train the call-off? been thinking about it, seems tricky to do without any corrections..can;t figure it out...


I guess you'd have to treat it the same as a recall, but I don't know how you would stop the dog self-rewarding by biting the decoy... (unless he has a little shed to dive into).

Personally, I use corrections if needed. I think they make it clearer to some dogs what behaviours are not allowed.


----------



## Jerry Cudahy

Joby Becker said:


> Lynda....
> 
> How would you train a call-off? without correction?
> 
> I know the recall, use the tug for reward...long line it so dog automatically corrects itself (which is a correction)...but what if the dog does not recall and bites in training? how do you fix that without corrections...
> 
> I am an idiot, and can't figure that one out, can someone explain it to me?


..................

Motivation recall first ... solid

U don't correct your dog.

The field helping hands provide the"motivation" to respond to your command to out recall. respond on your behalf.

Correction also is motivational. As evidence by forward corrections into a bite by a dog who takes it out on the decoy as a result of those corrections prior to the bite.



Another analogy. Someone sucker shots your face.

What are you motivated to do?


----------



## Joby Becker

Jerry Cudahy said:


> ..................
> 
> 
> What are you motivated to do?


bleed LOL  I'm a big wuss..

Thanks Jerry, makes sense...


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> Oh Alice but you already have stopped learning! It happened the moment you closed your mind to the fact that others are using a method successfully that has somehow allured you and others a like. Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the theory. Despite the fact that several have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?
> 
> _*Actualy you already answered your own question here...* ---> Because your unable to grasp the mechanics of the *theory*. Despite the fact that *several *have come on here and gave testament to the fact that it is indeed possible. Why is this so hard for you to believe?
> _
> _*Theory and actual hands on knowledge are 2 totaly different things...and several dogs does not mean ALL ! I never closed my mind tho the THEORY...i just stated that if i would HAVE to train my dogs that way that i wouldnt want to train them anymore...it would be a total and utter waste of time to bring by a passable result at best not to mention i would have to make sure the dog lived to see 25 in order to see any somewhat rewarding , not good mind you, but rewarding results. Trust me that i havent stopped learning and im sure i never will...every new dog brings something different to the table which makes it a perpetual learning experiance in my book. Im simple refuting the your statement that it works for ALL dogs...theory does not a FACT make!*_
> 
> 
> I also have well over 20 years training dogs and have trained more then one dog using this particular method and have been fortunately enough to witness many people train this way successfully. The difference is in past years I used to use a more traditional approach ...Koehler in fact and now have crossed over.
> 
> 
> 
> The trouble is Alice and those that think like you do is your making assumptions on something you've never accomplished. Namely training a dog without the use of physical force. I have and with breeds that are notorious for being stubborn, willful and hard to train. Not with something easy like a furry who was selectively bred for working closely with man. And because of that there is a certain amount of inherited biddability that a furry/herder brings with him to the training field.
> 
> _*The trouble is Lynda and those that think like you do is your making assumptions on something you know nothing about...you ASSUME i use physical force and therefor again ASSUME that i use it on every dog that i get my hands on...Im not saying i never used physical force...ill be the first to admit that...but it is not the bases i train my dogs with...i look at the DOG, just because a dog is willfull doesnt mean it has to be treated with physical and just because a dog is softer to handle doesnt mean at some point that it wont get a physical correction...and then theres the understanding of what physical is...but im sure you imagine me beating the everloving shit out of my dogs and kicking them over the fields just so i can scare them into obediance and to have them quiver in total and utter horror when they see me....youve made enough assumptions on my account on every front so this one ill hand you for free! Further you state every dog has inherited a certain amount of biddability...TRUE...i agree 100% but it also inherits a hell of a lot of other traits allong with that like persistance, endurace, character, build, color, hight...should i go on ? it all depends which trait is stronger in the dog and how you exploit these traits to your and the dogs advantage...*
> _
> 
> But let me get this straight from your past posts I gathered that if someone took your props away right now today, you honestly feel like you would be unable to train up a high level competition dog? Because they took your collars away? Now that really is funny.:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
> Just because you and others have been unable to apply this theory of training in your sessions and get the desired results doesn't mean it doesn't work. It just means you are not proficient enough in the theory to get those kinds of results.
> 
> _*Ok again with the ASSUME thing....you do know the saying right ? ASS U ME ? First of...what props do i use to start with...please enlighten me. if you are going to use a posting i made use it correctly....I love the whole taking my collars away thing....i only have one...stuck on a dog as we speak to be honest and i feel sorry for the poor bastard who would try to take it away since the dog wearing it is a total and UTTER BASTARD! where tho did you get the idea that taking my collars away would make me unable to train a high level dog...and NOT competition dog hun...i dont do the whole dogcompetition thing...im not intrested in that sort of thing...i train my dogs for streetwork and REAL LIFE...something you clearly havent got a very big grasp of. *_
> 
> _"Just because you and others have been unable to apply this *theory *of training in your sessions and get the desired results doesn't mean it doesn't work. It just means you are not proficient enough in the *theory* to get those kinds of results."
> _
> _*Nuff said by you yourself...i dont feel the need to elaborate on your THEORY....*_
> 
> Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training
> yielded more reliable working dogs?
> 
> _*God the assume quoting thing is getting old here but should i give it another go ?
> 
> ALL dogs ??????
> *_
> Another thing why is it when these types of threads come up all the nay sayers wanna jump in and trash it. I don't recall ever going on the e-collar and prong/pinch collars threads trashing them. What is it about a marker/clicker that rubs your furry the wrong way? When bless God all ya need to do is turn the dawg gone cat around.
> 
> _*By that statement allone you are again showing you asume that most if not ALL dogtrainers/handlers are using some form of choke/pinchcollar or ecollar...who ever said that a marker or clicker rubbed any of us the wrong way...and you want to turn the dawg gone cat around ? turn it into a PUSSY ?
> 
> you really wanna know what rubs me the wrong way...ignorance! people assuming they know it all, did it all, and can do it a hell of a lot better, and then not even being able to back up their words with FACTS...only THEORY...its people that make rash statements that they havent thought about condemning a whole way of training that they have absolutly no clue about...ill even go a step further here since im starting to warm up !
> 
> Its people who start treating their dogs like PEOPLE ! cuddle and kiss...asking their dog to do something for them, filling them up with treats and candy, creating fat unhappy dogs that dont know their place....i dont have any trouble cuddling my dogs and giving them treats but im expecting them to work for it! its a funny thing called nature of the dog...in nature it will have to work in order to get what it wants...no treats hanging in trees there ! no packleader patting it on the back when it misbehaves in some form or fashion.....i am yet to see the first packleader walk up to a lowerclass dog in its pack and say " well DAMN son...that wasnt very nice...please dont do it again and heres a treat so you remember next time"
> 
> enough with the assumption thing already Lynda...its getting irritating...FACTS not BS
> *_


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Joby Becker said:


> I could be wrong here but I think the types of dogs alice works with most of the time would probably think about eating her if they never got a correction.
> 
> I also think the EVERY DOG comment was silly...some dogs sure, every dog NO.


LOL trust me they have tried  but they havent been able to gobble me up yet...im a bit chewy


----------



## Jim Nash

Lynda Myers stated ; 

" Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training 
yielded more reliable working dogs? " .


What part of the training are you talking about ? 

If it's just the ordor recoqnition part I'd say you're pretty accurate but I'm sure someone somewhere has used force on a scent with some success . I actually did for my first K9 on article searching . I would of rather done it another way but he gave me no other choice . 

As for the rest of a "scent dog's" training , I've trained alot of detection dogs and others on this forum have trained ALOT more , but usually there is force used somewhere in it's training most likely in OB . OB being the dogs' basic OB training , OB in search patterns on searches , some even use pinch collars while on lead searching to slow down very active dogs down while searching . The final product in detection dogs usually has more correction based (physical and other) training in it then you think .

I just wanted to point out you are using a VERY small portion of a detectors dogs training as an example and because of that it's a very poor example of what you are trying to give merit to .

I've gotten into disscussions like this many times , I'm neither anti motivational training or anti training with physical corrections . I just cringe when others come on and say their type of training will work with all dogs . I have found through the years that training using as motivational a foundation in originally training a behavior is the best approach . Our K9 unit uses more motivational techniques in foundational work then most PSD training I've seen elsewhere and our dogs look better then when I first came into PSD work and our unit wasn't using as much motivational training . BUT even now there usually comes a time where corrections (physical and other) comes into play to finish the dog (Patrol or Detection) .

I've seen the successes in motivational training and preach it often . The problem I have is when others make exagerated claims about the success rate of motivational training , especially " purely motivational or positive training " and how it will work on all dogs . That's certainly not the case , not even close , at least in training for PSDs .


----------



## Doug Humphrey

This discussion reminds me of the Old Mule Trainer out west who was world renouned for his kind positive methods on Mule Training. He became so well known for his methods that the humane society decided to present him with an award. 

One day, two women arrived from the Humane Society, award in hand, and asked the trainer if they could have a demonstration of his techniques. The trainer siad he would be more than happpy to show them. 

The trainer grabbed a bag of cut up carrots and headed to the corral where the newest student Mule was waiting. The Humane Society women followed with giddy excitement. The trainer walked over to a small table set the carrots down and picked up a 4 foot section of 2 X 4. He walked over to the Mule and smacked him square across the head right between the ears. The mule hit the ground and then staggared back to its feet. 

The trainer turned around to see the now horrified women glaring at him... By way of explanation he said "Hey, first you have to get their attention":lol::lol::lol:


----------



## David Frost

Lynda Myers said:


> Something else to ponder why are all the scent dogs(bombs, narcotics , etc.) trained using motivational methods if physical force training
> yielded more reliable working dogs?


When I see comments such as this it makes me wonder if you people think "physical force training" does not include any positive reinforcment. If I had to quantify segments of training, I'd say 90 to 95% of all my training is positive reinforcement. To say there isn't any negative reinforcement of aversive training would not be accurate. Neither is say dogs are trained using only "physical force". 

DFrost


----------



## Faisal Khan

Doug Humphrey said:


> This discussion reminds me of the Old Mule Trainer out west who was world renouned for his kind positive methods on Mule Training. He became so well known for his methods that the humane society decided to present him with an award.
> 
> One day, two women arrived from the Humane Society, award in hand, and asked the trainer if they could have a demonstration of his techniques. The trainer siad he would be more than happpy to show them.
> 
> The trainer grabbed a bag of cut up carrots and headed to the corral where the newest student Mule was waiting. The Humane Society women followed with giddy excitement. The trainer walked over to a small table set the carrots down and picked up a 4 foot section of 2 X 4. He walked over to the Mule and smacked him square across the head right between the ears. The mule hit the ground and then staggared back to its feet.
> 
> The trainer turned around to see the now horrified women glaring at him... By way of explanation he said "Hey, first you have to get their attention":lol::lol::lol:


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Lynda Myers

Martine Loots said:


> I don't think Alice doesn't "believe" you.
> Only thing is she probably is used to handling a completely other type of dog then the ones you describe and maybe is more demanding about the final result.
> I also said that I think it may be done but depending on the type of dog and the result you want.
> 
> I also try the positive methods as much as possible, but with a strong dog sometimes you need to do more to achieve the result you want.
> For me this means that I want the dog to work at 100% of his capacities and you'll never get this result from a strong dog with only positive methods.


Martine I require a lot from my dogs and do not settle with the it's a bulldog so we can only expect so much. I will not settle for anything less then near perfection. Because true perfection is an ideal that can only be strive for and never obtained. 
I often have a conversation with a friend regarding Mals and Dutchies being trained using the method I currently use. as most everyone says it can't be done and that you must use a pinch and e-collar if you ever hope to accomplished anything with the dog competition wise. I personally don't believe it's true and am now researching kennels and bloodlines for a nice dutchie. So as to test the theory and if it is as everyone says will be the first to concede to the fact. But until then must go on what my own personal life experiences have bared out.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Ian Forbes said:


> Please point out the assumption(s) that I made.


That motivationally methods (none use of physical force) can not produce a high level competition dog regardless of breed, temperament, drives or hardness.


----------



## Julie Ann Alvarez

=D>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usfiAsWR4qU

Peace!

Julie


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Julie Ann Alvarez said:


> =D>
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usfiAsWR4qU
> 
> Peace!
> 
> Julie



even tho im not religious i think Händel's messiah is a beautifull classical bit of music...

Thanks Julie LOL....


----------



## Sarah ten Bensel

Joby Becker said:


> not arguing just sayin...we are in agreement...
> 
> how would you train the call-off? been thinking about it, seems tricky to do without any corrections..can;t figure it out...


 
The way I learned it was with corrections, but not as many...
I broke it down to the simplest behavor using the triangle method. Dog off the side of the blind, with helper in it. I would send him for a B and H and rewarded with a bite.

I would have him sit again (with me very close), helper would step in and give in a bite for sitting. 
I would sit him again , with me right there and asked him to "hier-fuss" (WHICH WAS TAUGHT AS ANOTHER SKILL), If he left and went to helper, I corrected him while the helper stepped away and dropped the sleeve. This was repeated until he came to the correct position and the helper would step in and give him a bite. For this dog, NOT getting to bite and fight was a powerful adversant.
From there I would add distance, sometimes sending in for B and H, sometimes, downing, sometimes calling him off. Eventually a call out from a B and H. Yes, I used corrections and compulsions until he learned it.

The randomness of the behviors and the rewards certainly didn't lessen the B and H in anticipation of the call out and allowed my dog not be worried when I approached.
I did practice "call-outs" with toys, etc. This worked with my dog so far.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Sarah ten Bensel said:


> Eventually a call out from a B and H.


I think Joby is asking about the Ring sport "call off", not a call out from a Bark and Hold. Did your training steps teach a "call off" also, where the dog was sent to bite and at the last second recalled to the handler without biting?


----------



## Lynda Myers

> _*Theory and actual hands on knowledge are 2 totaly different things...and several dogs does not mean ALL ! I never closed my mind tho the THEORY...i just stated that if i would HAVE to train my dogs that way that i wouldnt want to train them anymore...it would be a total and utter waste of time to bring by a passable result at best not to mention i would have to make sure the dog lived to see 25 in order to see any somewhat rewarding , not good mind you, but rewarding results. *_


Alice's assumption #1
That marker based/Operant Conditioning training at best only yields passable results and that it would take a lifetime to get even something rewardable.

When in fact it can be a quick process once the dog understands what the mark or click means. This also depends on the skill of the handler and their ability to read dogs.



> .but im sure you imagine me beating the everloving shit out of my dogs and kicking them over the fields just so i can scare them into obediance and to have them quiver in total and utter horror when they see me....


Alice's assumption #2
That I believe her or anyone for that matter who uses a method different then my own is a sadistic mad person. 
However their are a few out there who do in fact get off on inflicting pain on their dogs in the name of training.



> By that statement allone you are again showing you asume that most if not ALL dogtrainers/handlers are using some form of choke/pinchcollar or ecollar...who ever said that a marker or clicker rubbed any of us the wrong way.


It's apparent by the almost hostile denial that dogs really can be trained without the use of physical force. One could say thy protesth a little too much!



> you really wanna know what rubs me the wrong way...ignorance! people assuming they know it all, did it all, and can do it a hell of a lot better, and then not even being able to back up their words with FACTS...only THEORY...its people that make rash statements that they havent thought about condemning a whole way of training that they have absolutly no clue about...ill even go a step further here since im starting to warm up !


Alice's Assumption #3
That people who know there is another way to train are ignorant know it alls that think their better then others who don't. And that they don't have a clue to the other more common methods of training.
Where at any point in this thread did anyone say that? No one here to my knowledge condemn a whole way of training that is your mind forming those thoughts and words.



> Its people who start treating their dogs like PEOPLE ! cuddle and kiss...asking their dog to do something for them, filling them up with treats and candy, creating fat unhappy dogs that dont know their place....i dont have any trouble cuddling my dogs and giving them treats but im expecting them to work for it! its a funny thing called nature of the dog...in nature it will have to work in order to get what it wants...no treats hanging in trees there ! no packleader patting it on the back when it misbehaves in some form or fashion.....i am yet to see the first packleader walk up to a lowerclass dog in its pack and say " well DAMN son...that wasnt very nice...please dont do it again and heres a treat so you remember next time"


Alice's Assumption #4
Anyone who trains motivationally, treats their fat unhappy dogs like people, makes them wear coats and let's the dogs run a muck without benefit of leadership and rewards them for it. By feeding them Bons Bons all day while sitting on the couch watching the reruns of CSI.

Alice you want facts there truly are people as well as a schutzhund club trains just as has been outlined in this thread and are very successful at it. Several have competed at regional levels to my knowledge most all have been started as pups. And contrary to popular opinion there have been some pretty hard serious dogs trained and or fixed (2 were very dangerous dogs) in the group. Now who's showing their ignorance and naivety with the assumption that only a certain kind of dog can be trained this way. Or that it has no place in the bitework phase of training. And if you do use it there then the dog must have a weak constitution.

I think one of the reasons you don't see more handlers and dogs trained this way is because the majority say it can't be done or at best won't produce a reliable behaviors/routines as if a dog could ever be 100%. 
Besides only the strongest salmon are able to swim upstream against the current and reach their destination.


----------



## Joby Becker

Julie Ann Alvarez said:


> =D>
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usfiAsWR4qU
> 
> Peace!
> 
> Julie


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ1z-QPr6ZE
peace


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> That motivationally methods (none use of physical force) can not produce a high level competition dog regardless of breed, temperament, drives or hardness.


LYNDA...High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
WHAT SPORT? any sport?
any dog? 

How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
thanks in advance...
Joby


----------



## Mary Buck

Kate Kueper said:


> .
> 
> I also know Shade Whitesel in Washington who trains purely positivly. Shade and her dog Reiki have a CD, Sch 3 and FR1, using all positive reinforcement.
> Kate Kueper


 
Really? Ummm. Never mind.


----------



## Mike Jones

I primarily train using motivational methods. I only use compulsion when necessary. I believe that compulsive acts should be applied quickly, fairly and without malice. Once the dog performs the act correctly I give the dog a big reward with lots of praise. 

I have a question for Bob.

How do you train the out on a dog without any physical compulsion?

How do you get the dog to drop the sleeve without physical compulsion?

How do you teach the bark and hold without physical compulsion?


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> LYNDA...High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
> WHAT SPORT? any sport?
> any dog?
> 
> How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
> answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
> thanks in advance...
> Joby


What foundation have you laid for being in his head when a helper is on the field? This is something you must have trained in from day one. The dog must learn from the beginning I the handler control the where and when with regard to decoy or anything else for that matter. He also must come to realize that crazy out of control drive gets him nothing. he needs to learn how to focus through his drive again this needs to be started in the very beginning.
Early on the pup or dog should be accustom to seeing the helper on the field. So later as the bitework progresses it's not a big deal and the dog isn't crazy out of his mind. I can't stress it enough the dog has got to learn how to restraint himself in order to get what he wants...the helper.


----------



## Bob Scott

Mike Jones said:


> I primarily train using motivational methods. I only use compulsion when necessary. I believe that compulsive acts should be applied quickly, fairly and without malice. Once the dog performs the act correctly I give the dog a big reward with lots of praise.
> 
> I have a question for Bob.
> 
> How do you train the out on a dog without any physical compulsion?
> 
> How do you get the dog to drop the sleeve without physical compulsion?
> 
> How do you teach the bark and hold without physical compulsion?




Mike, the out is taught buy waiting out the dog then immediately reward with a rebite.
We had a dog at club that was purchased because he would out. Failed a the nats a few yr back. 
The first time he bit the sleeve he hung on for 10-15 mins. 
He immediately got a rebite. That bite lasted about half the time. Tired? maybe yes but each bite was faster and cleaner. In about a month the dog had super clean outs. 

Dropping the sleeve is nothing more then the out on a retrieve. The retrieve is taught by back chaining. 
You can also "bribe" the dog initially with another sleeve on another decoy. 

The B&H is taught with the dog being HELD on a long line and the decoy advances towards the dog.
AS SOON AS the dog stops pulling, the bite is given. 
I know, many will call holding the dog as correction. I don't carry the positive training that far but I will not correct the dog myself. Is it a negative? Yes, but I still haven't corrected the dog. 


A dog will soon learn what it takes to get rewarded, especially if the foundation in marker training has been done correctly.

The big problem with ANY training is to convince the dog that you have either a reward OR a correction at you beckoning. 
You can't go on the competition field and correct the dog and you can't go on the competition field with a tug/food/etc in your pocket. That's where good training comes in.
The advantage in bite work is the dog will always see a sleeve as being a possible reward because it IS on the field. This wont be hurt for not rewarding on the comp field because the dog was taught with random reward. 

These are ALL things that get their foundation training in puppys. Obviously older dogs with previous training will take longer but I've seen numerous< previously trained dogs do some dramatic turn around.

Motivational training IS NOT a cure all but it's my choice. I respect any dog trainer that accomplishes his goals with whatever properly executed training methods that work for them.


----------



## Joby Becker

Originally Posted by Joby Becker 
LYNDA...High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
WHAT SPORT? any sport?
any dog? 

How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
thanks in advance...
Joby


Lynda Myers said:


> What foundation have you laid for being in his head when a helper is on the field? This is something you must have trained in from day one. The dog must learn from the beginning I the handler control the where and when with regard to decoy or anything else for that matter. He also must come to realize that crazy out of control drive gets him nothing. he needs to learn how to focus through his drive again this needs to be started in the very beginning.
> Early on the pup or dog should be accustom to seeing the helper on the field. So later as the bitework progresses it's not a big deal and the dog isn't crazy out of his mind. I can't stress it enough the dog has got to learn how to restraint himself in order to get what he wants...the helper.


LYNDA..you quoted me but did not address anything I said...

lets try this again...

"High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
WHAT SPORT? any sport?
any dog? 

How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
thanks in advance..."


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> LYNDA...High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
> WHAT SPORT? any sport?
> any dog?
> 
> How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
> answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
> thanks in advance...
> Joby


What is a "hard drivey dog?" Do you not think the training/conditioning had a hand in creating that "I just wanna bite and to hell with anything else attitude?" Where in the process did you teach the dog that he gets his satisfaction [access to the decoy] through you the handler and how did you do it? What type of character/temperament/trainability are you selecting for and how are you developing that so that you are in the dog's head in all that drive and hardness? I'm just curious of the process for the non-motivational way.


Terrasita


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> Originally Posted by Joby Becker
> LYNDA...High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
> WHAT SPORT? any sport?
> any dog?
> 
> How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
> answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
> thanks in advance...
> Joby
> 
> LYNDA..you quoted me but did not address anything I said...
> 
> lets try this again...
> 
> "High level? how high is high? Regionals, Nationals, Worlds?
> WHAT SPORT? any sport?
> any dog?
> 
> How would you train a call-off, stop attack (FR, MR, PSA,KNPV,PP event) with no physical correction....??? with a HARD DRIVEY dog that really just wants to punish the decoy??? and not just bite the equipment...
> answer that and you have my respect on the matter...
> thanks in advance..."


 High level would be at least Regionals. I asked you what foundation did you laid for teaching the call off? I know how I have trained it but that won't work for you.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Doug Humphrey said:


> This discussion reminds me of the Old Mule Trainer out west who was world renouned for his kind positive methods on Mule Training. He became so well known for his methods that the humane society decided to present him with an award.
> 
> One day, two women arrived from the Humane Society, award in hand, and asked the trainer if they could have a demonstration of his techniques. The trainer siad he would be more than happpy to show them.
> 
> The trainer grabbed a bag of cut up carrots and headed to the corral where the newest student Mule was waiting. The Humane Society women followed with giddy excitement. The trainer walked over to a small table set the carrots down and picked up a 4 foot section of 2 X 4. He walked over to the Mule and smacked him square across the head right between the ears. The mule hit the ground and then staggared back to its feet.
> 
> The trainer turned around to see the now horrified women glaring at him... By way of explanation he said "Hey, first you have to get their attention":lol::lol::lol:


Now that made me laugh...


----------



## Christopher Jones

Lynda Myers said:


> High level would be at least Regionals. I asked you what foundation did you laid for teaching the call off? I know how I have trained it but that won't work for you.


Didnt know Schutzhund had a call off.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> That motivationally methods (none use of physical force) can not produce a high level competition dog regardless of breed, temperament, drives or hardness.


Where did I write that?

Comprehension 101.

I wrote that your claim that any dog can be trained up to high level competition, regardless of breed, temeperament, drive or hardness, was a guess at best and BS at worst. This is not an assumption. It is fact, because you have not met every dog in the world and trained them up to high level competition standard.

Keep digging....


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Quote:
_*Theory and actual hands on knowledge are 2 totaly different things...and several dogs does not mean ALL ! I never closed my mind tho the THEORY...i just stated that if i would HAVE to train my dogs that way that i wouldnt want to train them anymore...it would be a total and utter waste of time to bring by a passable result at best not to mention i would have to make sure the dog lived to see 25 in order to see any somewhat rewarding , not good mind you, but rewarding results. *_ 
Alice's assumption #1
That marker based/Operant Conditioning training at best only yields passable results and that it would take a lifetime to get even something rewardable.

When in fact it can be a quick process once the dog understands what the mark or click means. This also depends on the skill of the handler and their ability to read dogs.

*I will agree that skill of the handler and his/her ability to read their own dog is a very large part of training the dog...no dispute from me what so ever on that point...however to state that you can train any and every dog to its full potential in this way is still a great big lie...it is impossible simply coze you will never see every dog in the world to start with and you never will...also i dont think you have ever experianced a full throttle dog..and what i mean by that is a dog bred to a certain line that posseses certain traits that simply will not respond to your way of working or thinking...as long as you havent you can not state it will work for ALL dogs...you admited earlier that high level is atleast Regional but you seem to forget that not all of us are willing to settle for regional...especialy the people who train to compete or people like me who train their dogs to go into real life situations....stop thinking your method will work for each and every dog in the world and then we can finaly start to agree on something...you are talking about dogs that you have never even met yet you are so sure it will work...*

Quote:
.but im sure you imagine me beating the everloving shit out of my dogs and kicking them over the fields just so i can scare them into obediance and to have them quiver in total and utter horror when they see me.... 
Alice's assumption #2
That I believe her or anyone for that matter who uses a method different then my own is a sadistic mad person. 
However their are a few out there who do in fact get off on inflicting pain on their dogs in the name of training.

*In a roundabout way that is actualy what you are doing by stating things as an Ecollar or talking about taking props away...you have no idea or clue what kind of tricks or measures or props people use so you shouldnt make that assumption to start with...*
Quote:
By that statement allone you are again showing you asume that most if not ALL dogtrainers/handlers are using some form of choke/pinchcollar or ecollar...who ever said that a marker or clicker rubbed any of us the wrong way. 
It's apparent by the almost hostile denial that dogs really can be trained without the use of physical force. One could say thy protesth a little too much!

*Thats you view but is it correct ? I never said it couldnt be done..i said NOT ALL DOGS ARE SUITABLE or will work correctly using your view...you can say i protest to much and imply things but let me ask you this...howmany actual fieldworking K-9's have you trained and brought to an exam ? and i dont mean dogs used for tracking or drugs or something along those lines...I mean actual dogs that are there to take down a person if needed...dogs that will get an asskicking coze most thugs will not stand there and let a dog quietly chew them up....dogs that will take a bullet for their handler....im not calling the other dogs weaker but i am saying that these types of dogs do require a bit more then the average dog and thus need a different kind of training...if only to prevent the dog from thinking "well FK ME...he hit me ! that was no fun...goodbye" only to watch your dog haul ass to never work for you again... show me papers on how many of those you have succesfully trained...*

Quote:
you really wanna know what rubs me the wrong way...ignorance! people assuming they know it all, did it all, and can do it a hell of a lot better, and then not even being able to back up their words with FACTS...only THEORY...its people that make rash statements that they havent thought about condemning a whole way of training that they have absolutly no clue about...ill even go a step further here since im starting to warm up ! 
Alice's Assumption #3
That people who know there is another way to train are ignorant know it alls that think their better then others who don't. And that they don't have a clue to the other more common methods of training.
Where at any point in this thread did anyone say that? No one here to my knowledge condemn a whole way of training that is your mind forming those thoughts and words.

*you wanna know something funny ?I embrace all forms of training with the gentle one being my favorite since i like watching my dog have fun while doing its job...i dont want my dogs to crawl over the field looking intimidated and unsure of themselves...i am however not so arogant as to think that MY way of training and thinking will work for EVERY dog, where as you boldly and arrogantly state that your way does...you talk about taking away props and ecollars and being unable to train like that when i never even talked about using them to begin with...however on some dogs i do use them...but not all need it...*

Quote:
Its people who start treating their dogs like PEOPLE ! cuddle and kiss...asking their dog to do something for them, filling them up with treats and candy, creating fat unhappy dogs that dont know their place....i dont have any trouble cuddling my dogs and giving them treats but im expecting them to work for it! its a funny thing called nature of the dog...in nature it will have to work in order to get what it wants...no treats hanging in trees there ! no packleader patting it on the back when it misbehaves in some form or fashion.....i am yet to see the first packleader walk up to a lowerclass dog in its pack and say " well DAMN son...that wasnt very nice...please dont do it again and heres a treat so you remember next time" 
Alice's Assumption #4
Anyone who trains motivationally, treats their fat unhappy dogs like people, makes them wear coats and let's the dogs run a muck without benefit of leadership and rewards them for it. By feeding them Bons Bons all day while sitting on the couch watching the reruns of CSI.



Alice you want facts there truly are people as well as a schutzhund club trains just as has been outlined in this thread and are very successful at it. Several have competed at regional levels to my knowledge most all have been started as pups. And contrary to popular opinion there have been some pretty hard serious dogs trained and or fixed (2 were very dangerous dogs) in the group. Now who's showing their ignorance and naivety with the assumption that only a certain kind of dog can be trained this way. Or that it has no place in the bitework phase of training. And if you do use it there then the dog must have a weak constitution.

*Schutzhund ? what about the very large variety of other sports like FR IPO KNPV PSA and god only knows which ones i am missing....schutzhund training does not the entire world dog society make lynda and theres bitework for competition purposes and theres bitework for real life...trust me there is a difference here...*

I think one of the reasons you don't see more handlers and dogs trained this way is because the majority say it can't be done or at best won't produce a reliable behaviors/routines as if a dog could ever be 100%. 
Besides only the strongest salmon are able to swim upstream against the current and reach their destination. __________________



BTW: we can keep posting back and forth but im pretty sure we will never see eye to eye here


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> What is a "hard drivey dog?" Do you not think the training/conditioning had a hand in creating that "I just wanna bite and to hell with anything else attitude?" Where in the process did you teach the dog that he gets his satisfaction [access to the decoy] through you the handler and how did you do it? What type of character/temperament/trainability are you selecting for and how are you developing that so that you are in the dog's head in all that drive and hardness? I'm just curious of the process for the non-motivational way.
> Terrasita


:roll:

I am not even talking about my dog...LOL just in general...By hard and drivey I am NOT saying a dog that just wants to bite and the hell with anything else, I am talking about dogs of the nature of the 1% which Bob mentioned. Dogs that bring a high level of natural aggression into the bitework, dogs that like to fight people. Dogs that naturally try to dominate the decoy, dogs that are very possessive..a dog that you might have to make him sit or down, and get his attention, before you try to pick the tug up off the ground that he is possessing, or he will try to bite you. Dogs that would most likely eat half the people on here if they owned them, if raised with NO corrections. 

A good example of a dog on here to look at would be Tim's new pup Vitor. Does anyone really think that he will be able to train a call-off without any correction? Once he starts working the dog on another person, and starts bite work, does anyone think that the OUT will be able to be enforced using only positive methods? I do not... Tim won't try to train that way most likely, but I highly doubt anyone, even an expert in the type of training you are talking about would be able to do it. 

I still have not heard how it is possible to teach a dog like this a call-off without correction. Jerry did mention one way, but also stated that other people "persuade" the dog to follow the command.

If a dog that loves to fight the man does not stop and recall, or does not OUT in training, how would one change this behavior in a strong dog without any form of correction? I am not a know it all, obviously, but if you or anyone can explain this to me, I would like to learn...

I do understand you point of view Terrasita, and agree. It can be done, with some dogs, in some venues.

I am more responding the the comments made about HIGH levels of sport, and that this would work for every dog. That is simply not the case, and asked for clarification...what sport, HOW high? regionals, nationals, or worlds?


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> High level would be at least Regionals. I asked you what foundation did you laid for teaching the call off? I know how I have trained it but that won't work for you.


In what sport?

I have not trained a call off yet, I have a pretty decent recall that was trained with positive motivation and is now randomly rewarded with a tug. 

How should I proceed to train the call-off with a decoy without correction using these methods? dropping or hiding the equipment will not be an option, as said dog will engage the decoy, equipment or no equipment, there is no higher reward for her than fighting the man.

Can you share your method?

I am not arguing that it cannot be done, but to say it will work in any sport or with every dog is just not accurate.


----------



## Mike Jones

Lynda Myers said:


> What foundation have you laid for being in his head when a helper is on the field? This is something you must have trained in from day one. The dog must learn from the beginning I the handler control the where and when with regard to decoy or anything else for that matter. He also must come to realize that crazy out of control drive gets him nothing. he needs to learn how to focus through his drive again this needs to be started in the very beginning.
> Early on the pup or dog should be accustom to seeing the helper on the field. So later as the bitework progresses it's not a big deal and the dog isn't crazy out of his mind. I can't stress it enough the dog has got to learn how to restraint himself in order to get what he wants...the helper.


This sounds great in theory but forget about puppy foundation. Say you purchase a green dog 18 months old that you are training that is high drive. How do you train this dog?


----------



## Mike Jones

Thanks Bob, your method takes a lot of patience and most competitors don't have that much patience. I'm learning to take a deep breathes and relax. My tracking is so much better now that I'm using less corrections and more direction...letting the dog learn to work out the track instead of immediate correction when he gets confused or distracted. A verbal commands with my dog is working so much better.

With my next pup, I am going to really work hard to lay a good foundation so as it advances I can use less compulsion. Thanks for your candidness. I believe that compulsion uses correctly and fairly is a great way to train. However, for those of you that can master motivation than that's great but as you said to some extent soft compulsion or self corrections are used in some instances.

I train with a guy that teaches his B & H in a similar fashion the only thing different is that he has a loose prong collar on the dog so that he gets a self correction. He will repeat a exercise for months until his dog has it. He has a lot of patience. Than he tests the dog by having the helper step half the distance so that the dog can reach the helper. The dog learned not to bump the helper. It was amazing. I'm going to use that approach. Now he has the best and most intense B & H in the club. 

Hey Bob I use clicker training. It's a great way to teach the dog that by golly you got it right. It works wonderful with the jumps and the retrieve. ;-)





Bob Scott said:


> Mike, the out is taught buy waiting out the dog then immediately reward with a rebite.
> We had a dog at club that was purchased because he would out. Failed a the nats a few yr back.
> The first time he bit the sleeve he hung on for 10-15 mins.
> He immediately got a rebite. That bite lasted about half the time. Tired? maybe yes but each bite was faster and cleaner. In about a month the dog had super clean outs.
> 
> Dropping the sleeve is nothing more then the out on a retrieve. The retrieve is taught by back chaining.
> You can also "bribe" the dog initially with another sleeve on another decoy.
> 
> The B&H is taught with the dog being HELD on a long line and the decoy advances towards the dog.
> AS SOON AS the dog stops pulling, the bite is given.
> I know, many will call holding the dog as correction. I don't carry the positive training that far but I will not correct the dog myself. Is it a negative? Yes, but I still haven't corrected the dog.
> 
> 
> A dog will soon learn what it takes to get rewarded, especially if the foundation in marker training has been done correctly.
> 
> The big problem with ANY training is to convince the dog that you have either a reward OR a correction at you beckoning.
> You can't go on the competition field and correct the dog and you can't go on the competition field with a tug/food/etc in your pocket. That's where good training comes in.
> The advantage in bite work is the dog will always see a sleeve as being a possible reward because it IS on the field. This wont be hurt for not rewarding on the comp field because the dog was taught with random reward.
> 
> These are ALL things that get their foundation training in puppys. Obviously older dogs with previous training will take longer but I've seen numerous< previously trained dogs do some dramatic turn around.
> 
> Motivational training IS NOT a cure all but it's my choice. I respect any dog trainer that accomplishes his goals with whatever properly executed training methods that work for them.


----------



## Mike Jones

Joby Becker said:


> In what sport?
> 
> I have not trained a call off yet, I have a pretty decent recall that was trained with positive motivation and is now randomly rewarded with a tug.
> 
> How should I proceed to train the call-off with a decoy without correction using these methods? dropping or hiding the equipment will not be an option, as said dog will engage the decoy, equipment or no equipment, there is no higher reward for her than fighting the man.
> 
> Can you share your method?
> 
> I am not arguing that it cannot be done, but to say it will work in any sport or with every dog is just not accurate.


Maybe you can use a very long line like 100+ feet so that the dog can self correct. When the dog looks your way, a helper should be by your side with a bite or you can present a tug as a reward. Similar to how the B & H is taught in Schutzhund. Eventually with patience the dog will learn that when you call him he should come. Of course this may take a long time. 

In the past, I taught the call off with an e-collar. It's quick and effective and when the dog does it right he gets a a bite. Before I got into Schutzhund I would compete in a lot of backyard protection tournys that had calls offs.


----------



## Joby Becker

" I can't stress it enough the dog has got to learn how to restraint himself in order to get what he wants...the helper."

I agree...lets say the dog or even the puppy DOES lose it's mind once it sees the helper on the field playing with another dog. What steps do you take to help him learn?

trying to understand this method, honestly..
When you get time, please explain, and also explain the call-off. This will help all of us that are doubters, understand it better.


----------



## Matt Grosch

was going to post the link to the Ellis/Leerburg vid on youtube where he talks about a study and how taking the toy caused more physical stress than an E collar correction (if I remember right....something like "different forms of aggression'), but after he made an appearance, almost seems odd now



**too bad there isnt a way to select the names of certain posters so that only their posts are shown on a thread or at all, 18 pages is a lot to scroll through to find the individuals its seems worth paying attention to


----------



## R Janssen

Joby Becker said:


> How should I proceed to train the call-off with a decoy without correction using these methods? dropping or hiding the equipment will not be an option, as said dog will engage the decoy, equipment or no equipment, there is no higher reward for her than fighting the man.
> 
> Can you share your method?


In the old day's of the KNPV it was done with a net.

At the end of the trail coming from the woods was a pole on etch side, and a net mounted in between.
If someone pulled the rope, the net comes up/down.

Needles to say you did not catch fish in those nets.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

René Hendriks said:


> In the old day's of the KNPV it was done with a net.
> 
> At the end of the trail coming from the woods was a pole on etch side, and a net mounted in between.
> If someone pulled the rope, the net comes up/down.
> 
> Needles to say you did not catch fish in those nets.



LOL i remember that...and the net would have to become higher and higher since some dogs would just try to jump it at some point...

in KNPV theres so many ways to recall the dog...a very long line and call back but most just come to a sudden and very ungracious HALT at the end of the line...theres the Ecollar to use for a recall...having someone with a sleeve next to you so the dog gets to bite when he recalls as a reward...we have even tried walking into the path of the dog and sending it back if it tried to go on which wasnt a success since some dogs just think...fine no decoy to bite ? ill just take you instead...the dreaded recall LOL, not one of my favorites to train


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> In what sport?
> 
> I have not trained a call off yet, I have a pretty decent recall that was trained with positive motivation and is now randomly rewarded with a tug.
> 
> How should I proceed to train the call-off with a decoy without correction using these methods? dropping or hiding the equipment will not be an option, as said dog will engage the decoy, equipment or no equipment, there is no higher reward for her than fighting the man.
> 
> Can you share your method?
> 
> 
> I am not arguing that it cannot be done, but to say it will work in any sport or with every dog is just not accurate.


I realize that but unlike the other methods you can't just say ok I'm going start off at the call off and expect it to work.
Joby your dog does not understand that you are the giver of all there by controling it all...including his access to the helper the dog's ultimate reward. I know your dog doesn't know this because you said the he will engage helper regardless. 

This method is all about laying foundation. Just like building a house. You can't put the roof or walls up until a sturdy solid foundation is laid. 
when I start a dog/pup I will not move forward until the dog has mastered the first lesson...which is I am the most important thing on the field. Regards as to what else is going on around us. After this I will incorporate other things as rewards. Like say the dog/pup wants to engage the other members who are looking on. I will ask for a behavior mark it and give the people as a reward. After dog spends a few seconds with them I call him back and we continue on with the lesson.
The way I train is more then just letting the dog know he's right. It also teaches the dog to always be tuned in to me. It develops a mental line to him...gives me a way into his head. This you have to teach or condition as you gradually turn the dog's drives completely loose.
As with all methods the bar is always moving higher.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Mike Jones said:


> This sounds great in theory but forget about puppy foundation. Say you purchase a green dog 18 months old that you are training that is high drive. How do you train this dog?


ya start him the same way age has nothing to do with it other then it might process a little faster.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Linda said:

I realize that but unlike the other methods you can't just say ok I'm going start off at the call off and expect it to work.

Linda, I never trained for this in bitework but when I say "Fuss", my dog obeys, so he obeyed in bitework.

I'm not saying I don't have problems, but they are in "heeling" in the bitework.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> :roll:
> 
> I am not even talking about my dog...LOL just in general...By hard and drivey I am NOT saying a dog that just wants to bite and the hell with anything else, I am talking about dogs of the nature of the 1% which Bob mentioned. Dogs that bring a high level of natural aggression into the bitework, dogs that like to fight people. Dogs that naturally try to dominate the decoy, dogs that are very possessive..a dog that you might have to make him sit or down, and get his attention, before you try to pick the tug up off the ground that he is possessing, or he will try to bite you. Dogs that would most likely eat half the people on here if they owned them, if raised with NO corrections.
> 
> A good example of a dog on here to look at would be Tim's new pup Vitor. Does anyone really think that he will be able to train a call-off without any correction? Once he starts working the dog on another person, and starts bite work, does anyone think that the OUT will be able to be enforced using only positive methods? I do not... Tim won't try to train that way most likely, but I highly doubt anyone, even an expert in the type of training you are talking about would be able to do it.
> 
> I still have not heard how it is possible to teach a dog like this a call-off without correction. Jerry did mention one way, but also stated that other people "persuade" the dog to follow the command.
> 
> If a dog that loves to fight the man does not stop and recall, or does not OUT in training, how would one change this behavior in a strong dog without any form of correction? I am not a know it all, obviously, but if you or anyone can explain this to me, I would like to learn...
> 
> I do understand you point of view Terrasita, and agree. It can be done, with some dogs, in some venues.
> 
> I am more responding the the comments made about HIGH levels of sport, and that this would work for every dog. That is simply not the case, and asked for clarification...what sport, HOW high? regionals, nationals, or worlds?


 
If you assume the 1% dog has a rogue mentality that puts him in a mental place that the handler can't influence then that is what you are gonna get. He was conditioned for all that you mention. You might want to condition him for his relationship with his handler. If you start with force then that is what you have and all the baggage that can come with it. All I've seen so far is an ASSUMPTION that this 1% dog can only benefit from force. Nor have you established that hese 1% dogs are ALL highly competitive at the national and world levels. There is a category of dogs that play for real and they don't make the best sport dogs no matter how you train them because they aren't mentally wired for games and the force is never so conditioned that the dog doesn't become ringwise. I'm not one to get into games and aggression for show in an artificial sport setting. I'm usually more interested in what law enforcement needs on the street and maybe some of Suttle's military applications. I'll refer you to some Jim Nash's post on the usefulness of marker training with his dog. Again, this is about teaching a behavior. If you have already conditioned the dog that he can bite when he wants and you are not the source of the bite, then you are gonna have problems. If you have a relationship where you are not in his head when he is in bite/fight gaga land, you won't be able to reach him there and all you can hope for is that he won't run through your collar. There is a type of dog that will say, to hell with the correction, I'll suffer the consequences or they are so far gone, they don't feel anything. He'll fight with you on the same level he'll fight with that decoy. Its just keeps escalating where you can put that collar to influence him. You want to argue the impossibility before you have even tried it. All you can do as a handler is take your 1% dog and say I'm going to start out with teaching a behavior with markers instead of I'm going to have to force him into simple behaviors like sit and down. 

I spectated at a PSA trial. It was interesting to listen to a couple of the exhibitors state that had they not worked with marker based training and the Balabanov game with the dogs since puppyhood, they would never have an out. All the talk of where to place the collar because if he thinks it came from the decoy, he don't give a damn. What about those who use pain to amp or dogs that naturally amp from pain. Is this really what you want to start with and the CONFUSION. Lots of vehement objections over something you haven't set out to try to see if it works. If someone says it has worked for him then ohhhh, it must not be a hard dog or it must not be a really drivey dog. Or, it only worked on the club field and with the club decoy. Again, assumptions. There are plenty of dogs out there trained without a marker or positive reinforcement system that are club dogs. They knew from jump street they were going to be club only dogs. Character and nerves are something different from training. Whether that dog is specific or more of a generalist and you have trained with that in regard is also another story. Until you have worked from the beginning that the bite is the reward and you are the source of the reward, then it is all just theory. The naysayers are the ones that have those special dogs that they don't think it can work for. Someone that knows how to work with the theory needs to experiment with one of those 1% from the cradle. Otherwise it continues as a verbal volleyball exercise.

Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: It was interesting to listen to a couple of the exhibitors state that had they not worked with marker based training and the Balabanov game with the dogs since puppyhood, they would never have an out.

Such bullshit. Where are all these super powered dogs again ? Please remember that you were at a psa trial. LOL

Positive has it's uses, but I seriously question the actual strength of the dog for the most part. Probably a middle of the road dog.

There is nothing wrong with that, but too many people are all over about what their dogs are or are not, and that is counter productive. There are way too many people that are not comfortable with what their dog actually is, and are blind to what they really are.

If what you want to do is train your dog for years to get a title that should be long over with, then go with positive only. But be realistic about what the dog is.

For example, I was watching someone doing the OG the other day, and when the dog went back to the object, they threw a ball for him. He went after the ball and was happy for his reward. That is a middle of the road dog. I am using this dog as an example of what I am talking about, and not making fun of the training.

Another dog used to be rewarded in the blind with a tug from his handler, or a sleeve. This went away, and was pointless as a reward around two years of age. This same dog will never chase a tennis ball if there is a decoy on the field. This is an example of a dog that is above average.

The dog is what decides the training method, and not the trainer. The examples I have given are good training methods for sure, and while the one dog has success with positive, the other dog is not going to be successful with positive only.

My problem with positive is that many people are not looking at the dog in front of them. I see them hacking away at the same shit over and over and over, and the dog is in the same place that they were three years prior. I belonged to a club that used these methods to no great success. It was not the training as much as it was the trainers inability to adapt to the dog in front of them.

There is pressure on people to advance the dog the longer they train. Once you have your one, there is pressure to get your two and so on and so on. ****ing about with silly methods that take forever if at all are a sign of avoidance of this pressure. There are may many nervebags in the dogsport world, and I am not talking about dogs.

I do see many that use this positive training as an excuse to not advance, wether they admit it or not. I train this way as long as it works. However, it only last so long with some dogs. My dog Soda PoP outs really nicely for me. If the decoy winds her up, she is not going to out. She has done way too many repetitions to not know what she is supposed to do, but there it is, the dog dictates the training.

The bottom line is that I can wait her out, and teach her to ignore me until she feels like it, (tried that) and then reward her for being an idiot, or I can correct her, showing her that it is what I say, and when I say, and just get past the damn problem.

When you learn to read a dog, your life gets a bit easier. She had some moments where she was corrected pretty harshly, but she now will out like she is supposed to. Of course now that I have written this, she is going to screw me on the out. ](*,)](*,)](*,)

There are those that have dogs that will never be able to correct the dog. It is not in their genetic makeup. They feel it is cruel, or some silly shit like that. It is very hard to deal with these people, and their dog get stronger and stronger, so the correction that could have been a simple pop, is now much more severe, if it is to get through to the dog that he must do what he is asked.

This is the problem with theory. Dogs do not subscribe to the same stuff that we do.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: If you have already conditioned the dog that he can bite when he wants and you are not the source of the bite, then you are gonna have problems. If you have a relationship where you are not in his head when he is in bite/fight gaga land, you won't be able to reach him there and all you can hope for is that he won't run through your collar. There is a type of dog that will say, to hell with the correction, I'll suffer the consequences or they are so far gone, they don't feel anything. He'll fight with you on the same level he'll fight with that decoy.

You train dogs for bite work ?? I didn't know that. 

Maybe, oh just maybe, you are in over your head a bit. I don't think that joby has a clue, but I do wonder what you are thinking here. 

The relationship you have with your dog doesn't always mean shit when the dog decides to fight. I see a lot of conflict actually. There is what the dog has been conditioned to do, there is what you want, and there is the dog who has decided that he wants to fight. At that point, what chance do you really have ? I think we have already pointed out that the decoy is more fun for a strong dog than anything we have to reward with. What now ? The dog self rewards, and **** you and your training. People can squack all they want about this and that, but the bottom line is that if you have never seen it, watched your dog have it, then you probably need to not argue about it.

I love that silly relationship shit. I have a great relationship with my dog. It means **** all if he gets into a fight with a decoy.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

There's one thing i dont understand out of all this...people these days seem to treat a dog as if the dog actualy has a say in the matter ? as if it gets to decide how and what and funny enough the owner blindly follows the dogs lead...coze owwww we cant have it corrected now can we...god forbid we might present ourselves as being cruel to our dogs...what might others think of us ? (which i think is a large issue in the whole dogtraining thing) 

The dog has NO SAY...it simply has to DO...it doesnt get to dictate our behaviour its the other way around! ](*,)](*,)](*,)


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

Alice Bezemer said:


> There's one thing i dont understand out of all this...people these days seem to treat a dog as if the dog actualy has a say in the matter ? as if it gets to decide how and what and funny enough the owner blindly follows the dogs lead...coze owwww we cant have it corrected now can we...god forbid we might present ourselves as being cruel to our dogs...what might others think of us ? (which i think is a large issue in the whole dogtraining thing)
> 
> The dog has NO SAY...it simply has to DO...it doesnt get to dictate our behaviour its the other way around! ](*,)](*,)](*,)


Right you are, Alice. There is a lot of simularityin that with raising kids these days.....:roll:

Dick


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Ok, how much did your last puppy cost you ? Here, it is over a thousand dollars average. That is a big sting in the wallet for a pup.

How long has your club members been training dogs ?? Here, there are a few established clubs in ring sports, and a bunch of Sch, but over all nothing compared to the population.

People invest a whole bunch of money and time to train their dogs. Crazy amounts. The average drive time on several different boards has been around 2 hours, one way. Just to train a dog.

Logistically it is a bitch over here to compete. No matter what the sport. Then, you have the problem of people and their "feelings". People do not want to hear the truth of what their dogs are a good percentage of the time. It is all touchy feely and everyone gets a trophy because they tried hard mentality. Point out something to the wrong person, and you are the bad guy, because it is not what they want to hear.

There is a lot of opinion shopping over here. They don't want the truth about this or that about their dog, so they will take their ball and go play elsewhere, and trash you. I mean, how DARE you think fluffy is a cur, and tell them to stop wasting your time and theirs.

The whiners are rewarded CONSTANTLY. Man that is a big one. 

There are more, but I think this should make my point. You add all the softy softy personalities, with all the whiney crybabies, then charge a ****load of money for a pup, make them drive all over hell and back to get a half hour of training, and eventually all hell is going to break loose.

Chicks REALLY love positive training. Most have no business on the other end of the leash, but God forbid it is true, and you point that out. They want the dog to "have fun" and they want to "have fun" and so there you have it. A nightmare in a bag.

Many of the people you have been "discussing" training with on this thread have barely titled a dog, and only at the lower levels, or some sort of goof sport.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Ok, how much did your last puppy cost you ? Here, it is over a thousand dollars average. That is a big sting in the wallet for a pup.
> 
> *Latest addition was Robbie and cost me E 250.00 which for a Xmali or Xdutchie is a reasonably standard rate here...between 250 and 350 euros
> *
> How long has your club members been training dogs ?? Here, there are a few established clubs in ring sports, and a bunch of Sch, but over all nothing compared to the population.
> 
> *Our club was established in 1932 and we have members into 40 years of training at this club...*
> 
> People invest a whole bunch of money and time to train their dogs. Crazy amounts. The average drive time on several different boards has been around 2 hours, one way. Just to train a dog.
> 
> *average time would be about 30 minutes...for me its 10 tho...
> 
> 
> * Logistically it is a bitch over here to compete. No matter what the sport. Then, you have the problem of people and their "feelings". People do not want to hear the truth of what their dogs are a good percentage of the time. It is all touchy feely and everyone gets a trophy because they tried hard mentality. Point out something to the wrong person, and you are the bad guy, because it is not what they want to hear.
> 
> There is a lot of opinion shopping over here. They don't want the truth about this or that about their dog, so they will take their ball and go play elsewhere, and trash you. I mean, how DARE you think fluffy is a cur, and tell them to stop wasting your time and theirs.
> 
> The whiners are rewarded CONSTANTLY. Man that is a big one.
> 
> *Apart from the logistics nightmare which i can imagine being a total bitch since 2 hours drive would almost take me from one side of the netherlands to the other lol...the rest is the same over here...we have IPO and SCHH and VDH here and then theres the Kynologen...the flyballers and My dog and ME and behavioural therapists puppyclasses up the whazoo ooh lets not forget doggydancing! but i get where your going with your statement...my view is to each their own..if they enjoy it, well good for them, just dont come bother me or talk to me about my dogs and the way i train them when you have absolutly sweet **** all clue about what my dog is and who i am to begin with....
> 
> I do have to say tho that over here mentioning that you think a dog is a cur does not really present a large issue...the handlers or owners (atleast in my area and the ones i know out of that area) have no issue with it...they tend to be very laid back and more often then not will agree with you...Not everyone in the KNPV is like me...there are lots and lots of people who just do this for fun and will take a lesser quality exam and still be happy about it...its just that i will never settle for less but there are plenty people that will over here...(however these are also often the touchy feely kind of folks so it would make sence)
> *
> There are more, but I think this should make my point. You add all the softy softy personalities, with all the whiney crybabies, then charge a ****load of money for a pup, make them drive all over hell and back to get a half hour of training, and eventually all hell is going to break loose.
> 
> *No dispute from me there*
> 
> Chicks REALLY love positive training. Most have no business on the other end of the leash, but God forbid it is true, and you point that out. They want the dog to "have fun" and they want to "have fun" and so there you have it. A nightmare in a bag.
> 
> *Again no dispute from me...*
> 
> Many of the people you have been "discussing" training with on this thread have barely titled a dog, and only at the lower levels, or some sort of goof sport.
> 
> *Of that i have no doubt but them i think to myself...we have to start somewhere...i didnt know sweet fk all when i came into KNPV...the reason i had to do KNPV was that i got a dog as a birthdaypresent and the fker came out of a KNPV line and since i didnt know heads from tails with dogs back then i royaly ****ed up this dog...and it showed every time i went outside and it would attack the very first person on foot/bike/motor whatever...and if i tried to correct it it would simply turn around and take me on... Bloodline was Eros/van Dijk in Helmond...it actualy took a policeofficer rescueing me from my own dog on the street when i couldnt move back or forward and had an arm full of holes and a totaly shreded set of nerves and tendons...dog was 17 months at the time...went into KNPV....had to do some work on it but took it to exam at age 4 and got 432 at PH1...dog died with me age 16 BEST DOG I EVER HAD...i just needed to use my head and look at what it was...a DOG not a fluffy fkin toy to poke and prod at.....maybe i need to change my stance at some points of view, its just that my feeling is...if you are going to do something...do it RIGHT...no half measures and for god sake dont let the dog dictate you behaviour for you and lets face it..after 20 years i still have a hell of a lot to learn when it comes to dogs...dont think that will ever stop...*


----------



## Kat LaPlante

Joby Becker said:


> hey Jeff,
> I didn't read the entire thread here, but you know enough about dogsports, is there anyone that you know that titled any kind of ring dog without corrections? FR Mondio? I am going out on a limb here but am assuming that no one has done BR, PSA or KNPV without them...I can see doing SCH with the right dog for it, the 3-5 bites but what about the other sports...
> 
> anyone know people in any of these sports that has done it?
> 
> How long would it take to title an average (not even an a azzhole dog) to a ring dog to a 3 without any corrective measures, how many times would one have to leave with no biting from the field?


 
thanks for the redirect Joby, I am still looking for my answer, maybe I will get it with your better phrasing. Although I am pretty impressed that my thread has all these responses!!! Even if some are "gay"


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Such bullshit. Where are all these super powered dogs again ? Please remember that you were at a psa trial. LOL


I've seen you say this a couple times, Jeff, and realizing of course that all sports have their limitations, but what do you not like about PSA? I'm enjoying it much, much more than Schutzhund and it is, as far as I know, the only suit sport in my state since we started a club less than 6 months ago. I'm unfortunately part of the 2 hour drive club. #-o:-({|=


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Kat LaPlante said:


> thanks for the redirect Joby, I am still looking for my answer, maybe I will get it with your better phrasing. Although I am pretty impressed that my thread has all these responses!!! Even if some are "gay"


Ok well im going to go for the KNPV part....Over here in my area we have a club who almost exclusivly trains that way...now im not saying they do not give corrections since they do and ONLY in the biting part of training and the recall part of training but that correction does not go any further then a tug on the leash a NO and dragging the dog away...they work with toys, treats, words, and waiting out the dog in order to get the right behaviour...

I go to this club every month minimum...They have an awesome terrain to train on that has an industrial hall on it which is great for tracking with the dog and lots of other stuff...they are fine people and i consider them great friends...would never subscribe to their way of training tho since not a dog there has ever gone higher on a PH1 exam then 377 points...a WHOPING loss of 63 points... the almost never get the recall on the exam and almost never get the Fake attack on the exam...their dogs bite where they can reach...the lead trainers moto being "Vast is Vast"' loosly translated meaning.."if hes attached it dont matter where as long as hes attached" Dogs are approx 5 years of age when they go for the exam PH1...they actualy had a dog go to the summer exam at RODA last month for Object guarding that was 9 jears of age.. I am not going to put these people down...they enjoy their sports in the way the practice it BUT the way they train is so all telling...in all ways....draw your own conclusions


----------



## Don Turnipseed

If Kate is looking for answers, she need only look at the numbers. You have a couple people saying they have trained all motivational(which is obviously questionable), as opposed to everyone else, including dept LE dog trainers that have had to get results for years, saying it isn't possible. Seems to me that in itself pretty much answers the question for serious people.


----------



## Lynda Myers

We have gotten away from the original question which is can a dog be trained using motivational training only and the answer...YES! 
All the other replies reflect peoples personally feelings, preferences, and own life experiences. 
Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it. Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition. 
It amazes me that so many believe there aren't people out that can in deed carry it out successfully. Why is that? Is it just because you personally haven't done it or those your acquainted with it haven't? I never realized until right now just how closed minded most of you are.

Need I remind you that had that same closed minded thinking stopped people like Christopher Columbus, Wright Brothers, Thomas Edison etc. by listening to the nay sayers instead of following their own mind our world as we know it would be vastly different. 
Again the question was can it be done? Not how many people are doing, will you use it, or why won't it work? It was CAN IT BE DONE and the answer it YES!!!!!! Like it or not the answer is still YES!!!!

Ok I get it most won't train this way good, great, fine by me. So please stop coming here spewing all your negative BS. Highjacking every thread on motivational training with it. There are people who truly want to know more about method and all your doing is hindering the flow of information between them. 

If you refer to my response below to Martine you will see that I'm wanting to put your popular belief to the test.


> Originally Posted by *Martine Loots*
> _I don't think Alice doesn't "believe" you.
> Only thing is she probably is used to handling a completely other type of dog then the ones you describe and maybe is more demanding about the final result.
> I also said that I think it may be done but depending on the type of dog and the result you want.
> 
> I also try the positive methods as much as possible, but with a strong dog sometimes you need to do more to achieve the result you want.
> For me this means that I want the dog to work at 100% of his capacities and you'll never get this result from a strong dog with only positive methods._


I often have a conversation with a friend regarding Mals and Dutchies being trained using the method I currently use. as most everyone says it can't be done and that you must use a pinch and e-collar if you ever hope to accomplished anything with the dog competition wise. I personally don't believe it's true and am now researching kennels and bloodlines for a nice dutchie. So as to test the theory and if it is as everyone says will be the first to concede to the fact. But until then must go on what my own personal life experiences have bared out.


----------



## maggie fraser

Don Turnipseed said:


> If Kate is looking for answers, she need only look at the numbers. You have a couple people saying they have trained all motivational(which is obviously questionable), as opposed to everyone else, including dept LE dog trainers that have had to get results for years, saying it isn't possible. Seems to me that in itself pretty much answers the question for serious people.


Dunno about that argument Don, apparently I'm the only one on here (and perhaps yourself), that don't love/depend on dog crates. LE generally have a fairly short fixed timetable and programme, and most on here love to brand/trash motivational trainers as saps (which maybe some are, but that's not the point).

I think if there are peeps who believe they can train motivationally to a high level, way to go for them and can't be a bad thing, at least the dog won't get bashed about through handler mistakes. I don't think it correct to say it can be achieved with all dogs either, but I suppose that could be all down to the trainer at the end of the day as opposed to the method.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Funny how facts can be made out to be negative BS and how unproven theory can be brought up as Gospel  must be me...



> I personally don't believe it's true and am now researching kennels and bloodlines for a nice dutchie. So as to test the theory and if it is as everyone says will be the first to concede to the fact. But until then must go on what my own personal life experiences have bared out.


1 dutchie to test the theory...will this whole dutchie also represent the entire dutchie race as we know it if he either fails or passes your theory ?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: We have gotten away from the original question which is can a dog be trained using motivational training only and the answer...YES!

To do what ? To sit ? to down ? What level of training ? Do I get to distract the dog ? You see where this gets real messy ? 

Quote: Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it. Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition. 

Ok, it has been at least 10 years that people have been doing this stuff. Where is all the success ? WHere did they all go ? You are starting to sound like on of the "raw" people whose eyes roll up in their head with religious ecstasy.

We were doing the "motivational" outs in the late 80's, early 90's.

How long does it take ? It is easy to sit there and say, "well, you are not good enough" and silly shit like that, but the bottom line is that this has been around for 20 years, or more, and where is this training at ? Where are all these trainers that SWEAR it can be done ?

How long to get your dogs BH ?? I mean really, how long ? That shit should take about 3 to 6 months. How long did it take you ?

Now lets back track that a bit more. If your dog gets a BH and it takes you 3 or 4 years, who in their right mind is going to stand up and be counted amongst those that want to waste their time ?

It really is very similar to bulldog people in the sport. They all point to that one or two that did something. There are more of them out there that are getting titles, but that is more of the weaker nature of the sport than of bulldogs excellence. Kinda like the posi only training. There are one or two that have done something, but you don't see them on here defending it. One I think was quoted as having a FR1. wow.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: I'm enjoying it much, much more than Schutzhund

That is because Sch is gay. Did I really need to point that out to you ?


----------



## Candy Eggert

Lynda Myers said:


> All the other replies reflect peoples personally feelings, preferences, and own life experiences.
> .


  And your replies do not reflect the same? 

People that confident in their own skin, with their own dogs and training styles don't need to shove their philospy down other people's throats. Reminds me of religous zealots of non-believers. =;


----------



## Lynda Myers

Alice Bezemer said:


> Funny how facts can be made out to be negative BS and how unproven theory can be brought up as Gospel  must be me...
> 
> 
> 
> 1 dutchie to test the theory...will this whole dutchie also represent the entire dutchie race as we know it if he either fails or passes your theory ?


Guess what it doesn't change the fact that the thread was about can motivational training only be done and THE ANSWER IS STILL YES
Of course I knew someone would respond that way before posting it. But trust me it won't be some wuss ass nerve bag that needs to be defense in order to get him over his fear and engage the decoy. Like I've saw with several Mals here that are toted as high caliber dogs. As I detested a weak dog. A bullet I say would be kinder. 
New flash I'm not some squeamish, fluffy, bunny, hugging, mamby pamby kinda person. As your preconceived notions would lead you to believe. The dog I final get will be what most consider a good working prospect. Surely I don't need to tell you that a sound stable strong confident dog can pretty much do whatever you train it for. The limit would be in the trainer's own mind or skill level. 
And its evident that your's is pretty limited as well as closed. [-X[-X

Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field? I ask because that's what I was told by good source. So was curious to know if it's true. If it is wow that speaks volumes of the intelligence of those doing the training over there and we all otto follow suit huh? It would confirm for me what I have always wondered about...that their breeding dogs so high up in drive and hardness just to have a dog left after the training is completed. I mean what's a couple dead dogs among club members right?
Yet let's all get on that band wagon shall we! ;-)


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Lynda, in another thread where this was brought up you yourself said your dogs were reliable in the house, as long as you were there, but you wouldn't leave them unsupervised. You make it sound as though you have your dogs well trained as do many on both sides of this debate. If you can't leave your dogs in the house unsupervised, I have to question how well trained they really are. The real problem you and everyone else have, and always will have, is you have to be present for the reward. Yes, I know, I did it wrong. LOL If you have to be their overseeing them, the dogs are not really trained. I don't have to use the method any more than I have to see it's failing side. The dogs are simply not that reliable unless you are right there with your method....or if you keep at it until they are just old dogs.


----------



## maggie fraser

Don, I remember the thread you are referring to....now this is where a little inconsistency comes in to it for me. Linda, I thought you used good ol' compulsion for house manners, at least you stated so on the thread Don refers to, that can't be in keeping with the methodology here can it ?


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> Guess what it doesn't change the fact that the thread was about can motivational training only be done and THE ANSWER IS STILL YES
> Of course I knew someone would respond that way before posting it. But trust me it won't be some wuss ass nerve bag that needs to be defense in order to get him over his fear and engage the decoy. Like I've saw with several Mals here that are toted as high caliber dogs. As I detested a weak dog. A bullet I say would be kinder.
> 
> *You gotta love someone who knows it all...generalize much ?*
> 
> New flash I'm not some squeamish, fluffy, bunny, hugging, mamby pamby kinda person. As your preconceived notions would lead you to believe.
> 
> *To be quite honest...i dont have preconcieved notions when it comes to you at all....i have issue with your ignorance on the whole matter...what kind of person you are really isnt intresting enough for me to go into.
> 
> *
> The dog I final get will be what most consider a good working prospect. Surely I don't need to tell you that a sound stable strong confident dog can pretty much do whatever you train it for. The limit would be in the trainer's own mind or skill level.
> And its evident that your's is pretty limited as well as closed. [-X[-X
> *
> Make up your mind lynda...my mind is either limited or closed...it cant be both...[-(
> *
> Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field? I ask because that's what I was told by good source. So was curious to know if it's true. If it is wow that speaks volumes of the intelligence of those doing the training over there and we all otto follow suit huh? It would confirm for me what I have always wondered about...that their breeding dogs so high up in drive and hardness just to have a dog left after the training is completed. I mean what's a couple dead dogs among club members right?
> Yet let's all get on that band wagon shall we! ;-)
> 
> *I have no idea actualy...ive never heard of it happening that a dog died on the trainingfield...maybe someone else on this forum has ? and this good source ? is that an actual witness ? or a hearsay ? Personally i never like hearing these kinds of things but if i did i would first find out A] is it true B] what was the reason or what where the circumstances surrounding this dogs death?
> 
> I would not however go on a forum and maked veiled comments and accusations on how perhaps a dog died during a training and then fatten up this yet unproven incident to make myself look good and to prove a still unsubstanciated point....it would make me look foolish ! and it would cost me my credibility...what you are doing here lynda is grasping at straws...you have ignored most questions possed to you and now you are making somekind of reroute to try and shift the focus of a convo so you will somehow come of as credible...you should be in politics !! ive never seen a person evade a question as persuasive and consistent as you ! further more you should be ASHAMED of yourself!
> 
> i find it thouroughly disgusting that you would use something like this in order to try and put something in a negative light so as that you can keep trying to persuade people of your theory....if you want to win people over to your side bring out facts and proof not unsubstanciated bullshit that you havent even tried to check for truth or reason!
> 
> After this remark i actauly dont even want to talk to you anymore im that disgusted with you and your whole way of grasping at straws...SICKENING ! SHAME ON YOU LYNDA![-X
> *


----------



## Kat LaPlante

you guys are going to get this thread locked, you're bullying Lynda.....wow that sounded like I am 10. seriously dont pick on her on this thread, it would suck if it got locked because of something that silly. I have come to some conlusions after sorting through all these posts.

1. Jeff O and I need to learn how to quote individual sentences, I just quote the whole post but you retype the stuff.

2. Compulsion itself is simply too broad to EVER be eliminated.
3. the elimination of compulsion results in dogs not meeting their full potention in an expedited time frame, if ever.
4. More postive motivation should be incorporated into all our training


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Lynda Myers said:


> We have gotten away from the original question which is can a dog be trained using motivational training only and the answer...YES!





Lynda Myers said:


> All the other replies reflect peoples personally feelings, preferences, and own life experiences.
> Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it. Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition.
> It amazes me that so many believe there aren't people out that can in deed carry it out successfully. Why is that? Is it just because you personally haven't done it or those your acquainted with it haven't? I never realized until right now just how closed minded most of you are.




I think part of the reason is because nobody is given concrete examples. I'm not the only person who has asked on this thread, who has done it, and what level? A SchII dog who might have done the II at a Regional, Bob's dog Thunder and Shade's dog were the only 3 mentioned. Although a comment was made that Bob may have used some compulsion, and nobody has countered that, at least that I saw. I'd be curious if Shade will say that she has never applied compulsion to her dog.

Either way though, even if all 3 of those dogs have never seen compulsion, none of them are out winning at National or World events. 

I wouldn't deny that dogs can be trained without compulsion, I'm sure it's true. But in what venue, and to what level, for me that's the question. If this technique was really successful, I think we'd see a lot more people using it. Reality is people want success, and will use whatever methods are going to get them there.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Kat LaPlante said:


> you guys are going to get this thread locked, you're bullying Lynda.....wow that sounded like I am 10. seriously dont pick on her on this thread, it would suck if it got locked because of something that silly. I have come to some conlusions after sorting through all these posts.
> 
> 1. Jeff O and I need to learn how to quote individual sentences, I just quote the whole post but you retype the stuff.
> 
> 2. Compulsion itself is simply too broad to EVER be eliminated.
> 3. the elimination of compulsion results in dogs not meeting their full potention in an expedited time frame, if ever.
> 4. More postive motivation should be incorporated into all our training



No were not  and shes a big girl...if she feels bullied she can stand up for herself dont you think ? and im not picking on her im refuting her statements and pointing out where i feel she is flawed in her preception and theory...if thats picking on then we can hardly open another topic on this forum for fear of people disagreeing with eachother and having a topic locked...

I will give you this tho kat...its true in the last post i went and lost it...but i feel justifyable (bet that word is typed wrong) so...unfounded accusation, hearsay and such do not go far in my book...be honest..to the point and dont try and suggest things that are yet to be proven as being fact...

I will ask the MODS and ADMINS to please not lock this thread...I have no intention of interacting with Lynda after her last post since it has left a very bad taste in my mouth....I apologize to Kat for not keeping to the topic at times...


----------



## Candy Eggert

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: I'm enjoying it much, much more than Schutzhund
> 
> That is because Sch is gay. Did I really need to point that out to you ?


I've told Mister that Schutzhund is not gay...it's happy \\/\\/\\/


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Candy Eggert said:


> I've told Mister that Schutzhund is not gay...it's happy \\/\\/\\/



Candy,

Have you ever heard anyone that has actually done Schutzhund call it gay?


----------



## maggie fraser

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I think part of the reason is because nobody is given concrete examples. I'm not the only person who has asked on this thread, who has done it, and what level? A SchII dog who might have done the II at a Regional, Bob's dog Thunder and Shade's dog were the only 3 mentioned. Although a comment was made that Bob may have used some compulsion, and nobody has countered that, at least that I saw. I'd be curious if Shade will say that she has never applied compulsion to her dog.
> 
> Either way though, even if all 3 of those dogs have never seen compulsion, none of them are out winning at National or World events.
> 
> I wouldn't deny that dogs can be trained without compulsion, I'm sure it's true. But in what venue, and to what level, for me that's the question. If this technique was really successful, I think we'd see a lot more people using it. Reality is people want success, and will use whatever methods are going to get them there.


Success is perhaps another word that could use some more definition....it can mean different things to different people. I find the concept of motivational training interesting and I do enjoy to follow both sides of the discussion, what makes it more interesting to me is that I stumbled across more motivational ways of horse training through problem solving which made me very open to many things animal. We have more knowledge and research now into animals but it is still very much a developing area....for anyone to come on here and say you can't do this or you can't do that....are as bad as each other.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Kat LaPlante said:


> I need to learn how to quote individual sentences, I just quote the whole post but you retype the stuff.


When you quote something, you will see brackets that look like [ and ] around the word QUOTE and /QUOTE at the beginning and end of the quoted section.

You can break one big quote up into smaller quotes by putting an "end quote" which is the /QUOTE and a new beginning quote QUOTE (don't forget the brackets, but if I put them here it will turn it into a quote LOL) each place you want a break. If you replace the { and } in the text below with [ and ] 

{QUOTE}My Line 1{/QUOTE}

Your Text here

{QUOTE}My Line 2{/QUOTE}

Your Text here

{QUOTE}My Line 3{/QUOTE}

Your Text here

{QUOTE}My Line 4{/QUOTE}

Your Text here

Will look like



> My Line 1


Your Text here



> My Line 2


Your Text here



> My Line 3


Your Text here



> My Line 4


Your Text here


----------



## Candy Eggert

Thomas Barriano said:


> Candy,
> 
> Have you ever heard anyone that has actually done Schutzhund call it gay?


Thomas,

LMAO NO!! Good point, well taken


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: 
Have you ever heard anyone that has actually done Schutzhund call it gay? 

Thomas, I have trained with you, and saw your dogs at the time. I would not call what you do Schutzhund. Maybe recklessly trialing in hopes of a passing score.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: We have more knowledge and research now into animals but it is still very much a developing area....for anyone to come on here and say you can't do this or you can't do that....are as bad as each other.

Farting around with dog training and then joining a discussion where the basic idea is "can these goals be achieved without compulsion" is just silly.

I am saying that people cannot do it, with out a certain type of dog. I guess that is just entirely missed here. People would rather argue and fuss and kill dogs off in their heads.

It has been around long enough that if it was going to happen, it would have by now. I would have loved to see it work. I still think that maybe it can, with certain limitations.

However, instead of discussing this, of course, it is better to just lash out and make a fuss.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:
> Have you ever heard anyone that has actually done Schutzhund call it gay?
> 
> Thomas, I have trained with you, and saw your dogs at the time. I would not call what you do Schutzhund. Maybe recklessly trialing in hopes of a passing score.


I don't give a rats ass what YOU call anything Jeff.
"Recklessly trialing in hopes of a passing score" is fukin funny coming from someone with SIX zero's in one trial with a dog that most other people would be on the podium with.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: I'm enjoying it much, much more than Schutzhund
> 
> That is because Sch is gay. Did I really need to point that out to you ?


You've said it yourself before. If that's all that people have available, then that's all that they have available. That being said, I will drive 2 hours each way to train in PSA on a regular basis (up to 3-4 times a week as my schedule allows). I would not drive that to train in Schutzhund. :wink: So why do you dislike PSA? Is it the organization, the sport, the people, or what?


----------



## Mary Buck

Lynda Myers said:


> Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it. Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition.
> It amazes me that so many believe there aren't people out that can in deed carry it out successfully. Why is that? Is it just because you personally haven't done it or those your acquainted with it haven't? I never realized until right now just how closed minded most of you are.
> 
> .


Training a dog is this way has actually come and gone from Competitive Obedience ...so you are not the whacky free-thinker you think. It was all the rage about 10-12 years ago....everyone jumped on the bandwagon and were, I dare say as resolute and starry eyed as you appear to be. They did n't get results. This is for dogs that Trial weekend after weekend, class after class. So all those people have swung back to a more balanced training style. Motivational training...absolutely...purely positive...probably not. 

And I don't think all the multitudes of trainers here are closed-minded. They are however....experienced . And somewhat successful.


----------



## Matt Nieuwkoop

Shade is currently unable to post on this forum. She asked me to post that she will be happy to comment on her training methods here as soon as it is technically possible.
Thanks
Matt


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: "Recklessly trialing in hopes of a passing score" is fukin funny coming from someone with SIX zero's in one trial with a dog that most other people would be on the podium with.

How about Jago's gift of 36 points ?? LOL Went right back to Sch.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I am saying that people cannot do it, with out a certain type of dog. I guess that is just entirely missed here. People would rather argue and fuss and kill dogs off in their heads.
> 
> It has been around long enough that if it was going to happen, it would have by now. I would have loved to see it work. I still think that maybe it can, with certain limitations.
> 
> However, instead of discussing this, of course, it is better to just lash out and make a fuss.


And what type of dog would it have to be and what are those certain limitations. 

Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: For example, I was watching someone doing the OG the other day, and when the dog went back to the object, they threw a ball for him. He went after the ball and was happy for his reward. That is a middle of the road dog. I am using this dog as an example of what I am talking about, and not making fun of the training.

Another dog used to be rewarded in the blind with a tug from his handler, or a sleeve. This went away, and was pointless as a reward around two years of age. This same dog will never chase a tennis ball if there is a decoy on the field. This is an example of a dog that is above average.


I guess you didn't read this part.

Maybe then you didn't read the part where I was wondering about you training in bite work.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> And what type of dog would it have to be and what are those certain limitations.
> 
> Terrasita



I dont know how to put this right but there is such a large variety in dogcharacter that im thinking it would work with the more docille dogs...im not conviced that it would work on certain kinds of working dogs for the simple reason that it would take to long to start with plus theres the fact that we pick working dogs for their very nature alone to do what we do...we search for certain traits in behaviour and character which will make it harder if sometimes not impossible to get certain things done...i myself am a firm believer that dogs are not submissive in nature...I feel they are opportunist that will do their best in life to better their situation...they will test your limits to see how strong you are but they will not naturaly submit to us...we have to guide them during their life and raise them to adulthood...a dog does not raise itself, we raise it...but we have to keep in mind what kind of dog we have...there are so many breeds out there with so many traits and we pick one that suits us...so i would think in order for this to work it would have to be a docille dog...it could still be a working dog to apply this but im not convinced it can be done with dogs that do bitework or that have high demands made of them in every day life...be it for real life purposes or competition purposes....we pick our prefered breeds with a reason....and that seems to be forgotten...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote:
> Positive has it's uses, but I seriously question the actual strength of the dog for the most part. Probably a middle of the road dog.
> 
> *So the assumption is that if you can train it positively, it has to be a middle of the road dog. *
> 
> There is nothing wrong with that, but too many people are all over about what their dogs are or are not, and that is counter productive. There are way too many people that are not comfortable with what their dog actually is, and are blind to what they really are.
> 
> If what you want to do is train your dog for years to get a title that should be long over with, then go with positive only. But be realistic about what the dog is.
> 
> For example, I was watching someone doing the OG the other day, and when the dog went back to the object, they threw a ball for him. He went after the ball and was happy for his reward. That is a middle of the road dog. I am using this dog as an example of what I am talking about, and not making fun of the training.
> 
> Another dog used to be rewarded in the blind with a tug from his handler, or a sleeve. This went away, and was pointless as a reward around two years of age. This same dog will never chase a tennis ball if there is a decoy on the field. This is an example of a dog that is above average.
> 
> *Maybe instead of trying to reward with something external, you use what the dog wants as the reward? Just a thought. That's part of the doing it right. Be sure you use as the reward, what the dog sees as reward and not what the handler thinks ought to be the reward.*
> 
> The dog is what decides the training method, and not the trainer. The examples I have given are good training methods for sure, and while the one dog has success with positive, the other dog is not going to be successful with positive only.
> 
> My problem with positive is that many people are not looking at the dog in front of them. I see them hacking away at the same shit over and over and over, and the dog is in the same place that they were three years prior. I belonged to a club that used these methods to no great success. It was not the training as much as it was the trainers inability to adapt to the dog in front of them.
> 
> There is pressure on people to advance the dog the longer they train. Once you have your one, there is pressure to get your two and so on and so on. ****ing about with silly methods that take forever if at all are a sign of avoidance of this pressure. There are may many nervebags in the dogsport world, and I am not talking about dogs.
> 
> *Why does any one have to feel pressured by outsiders to advance the dog. You're saying that they are nervy not to get there as fast as the pressure says they should? That's interesting. Hadn't seen competition put in that light before. Maybe the ones that chart their own course aren't in avoidance but but have the guts to do what they want. But you do generally say that the sport and I guess implicit in that is the competition, is more important to the dog. *
> 
> I do see many that use this positive training as an excuse to not advance, wether they admit it or not. I train this way as long as it works. However, it only last so long with some dogs. My dog Soda PoP outs really nicely for me. If the decoy winds her up, she is not going to out. She has done way too many repetitions to not know what she is supposed to do, but there it is, the dog dictates the training.
> 
> *You train what way as long as it works?*
> 
> The bottom line is that I can wait her out, and teach her to ignore me until she feels like it, (tried that) and then reward her for being an idiot, or I can correct her, showing her that it is what I say, and when I say, and just get past the damn problem.
> 
> When you learn to read a dog, your life gets a bit easier. She had some moments where she was corrected pretty harshly, but she now will out like she is supposed to. Of course now that I have written this, she is going to screw me on the out. ](*,)](*,)](*,)
> 
> *So those corrections really aren't all that reliable in the end?*
> 
> There are those that have dogs that will never be able to correct the dog. It is not in their genetic makeup. They feel it is cruel, or some silly shit like that. It is very hard to deal with these people, and their dog get stronger and stronger, so the correction that could have been a simple pop, is now much more severe, if it is to get through to the dog that he must do what he is asked.
> 
> This is the problem with theory. Dogs do not subscribe to the same stuff that we do.


*That's interesting. What do you do with the ones that don't subscribe to the correction theory. I agree they aren't lab rats. Lets exempt the tree huggers from the discussion. You all first say it can't work. Then you say if it could SOMEONE would have done it already. Why? They don't have a problem with correction based training and they think it works for them. It really has nothing to do with whether it could work. Then you say it could work but it will take longer and that's just avoiding the pressure of being urged to put the titles on at a faster pace. And if you don't respond to the pressure, you're just nervy? So you're letting other people dictate to you how to train your dog and at what pace and that says you're more stable? We're past whether the method could work but its not fast enough for the competitors that are cattle prodding you to the next level. Okay.*


*Terrasita *


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: So the assumption is that if you can train it positively, it has to be a middle of the road dog

It is not an assumption, and if you don't mind telling us what your experience with this type of training is, that would be great. 

I am not going to bother reading the rest. You made an assumption, which makes an ass out of you.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Oh well, I guess that's your game over response.

Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

So what is your experience with bite work again ? I don't think you have any.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Alice Bezemer said:


> I dont know how to put this right but there is such a large variety in dogcharacter that im thinking it would work with the more docille dogs...im not conviced that it would work on certain kinds of working dogs for the simple reason that it would take to long to start with plus theres the fact that we pick working dogs for their very nature alone to do what we do...we search for certain traits in behaviour and character which will make it harder if sometimes not impossible to get certain things done...i myself am a firm believer that dogs are not submissive in nature...I feel they are opportunist that will do their best in life to better their situation...they will test your limits to see how strong you are but they will not naturaly submit to us...we have to guide them during their life and raise them to adulthood...a dog does not raise itself, we raise it...but we have to keep in mind what kind of dog we have...there are so many breeds out there with so many traits and we pick one that suits us...so i would think in order for this to work it would have to be a docille dog...it could still be a working dog to apply this but im not convinced it can be done with dogs that do bitework or that have high demands made of them in every day life...be it for real life purposes or competition purposes....we pick our prefered breeds with a reason....and that seems to be forgotten...


So:

1) it takes too long
2) We search for certain traits in behavior and character which will make it harder if sometimes not impossible to get certain things done. . . Fair enough. What traits and what behavior that make what harder or impossible to get done. 
3) Have you ever tried any of this with such a dog? Where did it fall apart?
4) Define docile.

Just for the record, I don't have any religious zeal and I don't think one thing will necessarily work for all dogs. I'm still curious with the national/world type of dog if any one can specifically characterize this dog's mental make up that explains why any aspect of motivational training can't work. Alice is the only one that has come close.

Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Alice is the only one that has come close.

How would you know ?


----------



## Lynda Myers

Kat LaPlante said:


> you guys are going to get this thread locked, you're bullying Lynda.....wow that sounded like I am 10. seriously dont pick on her on this thread, it would suck if it got locked because of something that silly. I have come to some conlusions after sorting through all these posts.
> 
> 1. Jeff O and I need to learn how to quote individual sentences, I just quote the whole post but you retype the stuff.
> 
> 2. Compulsion itself is simply too broad to EVER be eliminated.
> 3. the elimination of compulsion results in dogs not meeting their full potention in an expedited time frame, if ever.
> 4. More postive motivation should be incorporated into all our training


Thank you Kat but I do have my big girl panties on and while it looks like bullying it really is just people looking for a way around the actual fact that dogs can be trained completely motivationally. No harm no foul. I sit here at the keyboard and laugh because people are so easily goaded. Not to mention they take it so personal.
And as to the mods locking the thread please oh please don't lock the thread over some heated debate. My skin is way thicker then that kinda like the bulldogs I own...it's ok if the fur flies on occasion.:mrgreen:


----------



## Lynda Myers

*



I have no idea actualy...ive never heard of it happening that a dog died on the trainingfield...maybe someone else on this forum has ? and this good source ? is that an actual witness ? or a hearsay ? Personally i never like hearing these kinds of things but if i did i would first find out A] is it true B] what was the reason or what where the circumstances surrounding this dogs death? 

I would not however go on a forum and maked veiled comments and accusations on how perhaps a dog died during a training and then fatten up this yet unproven incident to make myself look good and to prove a still unsubstanciated point....it would make me look foolish ! and it would cost me my credibility...what you are doing here lynda is grasping at straws...you have ignored most questions possed to you and now you are making somekind of reroute to try and shift the focus of a convo so you will somehow come of as credible...you should be in politics !! ive never seen a person evade a question as persuasive and consistent as you ! further more you should be ASHAMED of yourself!

i find it thouroughly disgusting that you would use something like this in order to try and put something in a negative light so as that you can keep trying to persuade people of your theory....if you want to win people over to your side bring out facts and proof not unsubstanciated bullshit that you havent even tried to check for truth or reason!

After this remark i actauly dont even want to talk to you anymore im that disgusted with you and your whole way of grasping at straws...SICKENING ! SHAME ON YOU LYNDA!








Click to expand...

LOLOLOLOLOLOL Which is it I've never heard of it happening or personally I never like hearing these kind of things?

That is what I'm trying to do is find out. There's no way for me to know I don't live or train over there. So inquired of someone who might know. Besides I merely asked if it was true, a simple yes, no or I don't know would have sufficed. 
Funny when it come from your mouth it's fact but from mine it's bs or an impossibly. Sounds like double standards to me.*


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: "Recklessly trialing in hopes of a passing score" is fukin funny coming from someone with SIX zero's in one trial with a dog that most other people would be on the podium with.
> 
> How about Jago's gift of 36 points ?? LOL Went right back to Sch.


Mr Internet Mondio Ring Expert is critisizing a Sch Dobermann dabbling in MR for a 36/100 score when he gets a 240 (barely
qualifying level II score) at the III level with a MR Malinois (who's brother actually won the event?) bwahahahahahahahaha
You have to realize your limitations Jeff. You did fine at Colorado Mondio Ring as a bite suit booty boy when you followed Charlies instructions. I don't know where you got the idea that you were a decoy (did you EVER get certified?) much less a dog trainer.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Don Turnipseed said:


> Lynda, in another thread where this was brought up you yourself said your dogs were reliable in the house, as long as you were there, but you wouldn't leave them unsupervised. You make it sound as though you have your dogs well trained as do many on both sides of this debate. If you can't leave your dogs in the house unsupervised, I have to question how well trained they really are. The real problem you and everyone else have, and always will have, is you have to be present for the reward. Yes, I know, I did it wrong. LOL If you have to be their overseeing them, the dogs are not really trained. I don't have to use the method any more than I have to see it's failing side. The dogs are simply not that reliable unless you are right there with your method....or if you keep at it until they are just old dogs.


Don don't talk to me about dogs been good in the house when the majority of your's are untrained and kenneled several to a pen. Whether I crate or leave out is personal preference and has nothing to do with whether or not their trained.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> LOLOLOLOLOLOL Which is it I've never heard of it happening or personally I never like hearing these kind of things?
> 
> That is what I'm trying to do is find out. There's no way for me to know I don't live or train over there. So inquired of someone who might know. Besides I merely asked if it was true, a simple yes, no or I don't know would have sufficed.
> Funny when it come from your mouth it's fact but from mine it's bs or an impossibly. Sounds like double standards to me.


Let me help you...ive never heard of it happening AND i dont like hearing of these kinds of things...


you simply asked if it was true...so the whole comment behind that was just bonus on your side ? 
*


Lynda Myers;215891
[/B said:



Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field? I ask because that's what I was told by good source. So was curious to know if it's true.If it is wow that speaks volumes of the intelligence of those doing the training over there and we all otto follow suit huh? It would confirm for me what I have always wondered about...that their breeding dogs so high up in drive and hardness just to have a dog left after the training is completed. I mean what's a couple dead dogs among club members right?
Yet let's all get on that band wagon shall we! 

Click to expand...



Now explain to me how i should interpret that ? you go from "If thats true" right to "whats a couple of dead dogs" hows that not insinuating something more then you actualy know for fact? atleast have the common sence to then type as if you are waiting for a verification instead of starting insinuating and creating some sort of veiled innuendo...*


----------



## Lynda Myers

maggie fraser said:


> Don, I remember the thread you are referring to....now this is where a little inconsistency comes in to it for me. Linda, I thought you used good ol' compulsion for house manners, at least you stated so on the thread Don refers to, that can't be in keeping with the methodology here can it ?


Maggie where's the inconsistency in that...there is manners and then there's training for competition. On the training field and/or training sessions it's all positive. besides I don't let bad habits or behaviors get a foot hold I deal with it before it becomes a real problem there by requiring little correction.
But when you say good ole' compulsion trust me don't pull out the whips, chains pinch and/or e-collars. Most of it is done with body pressure and threat. When I want to I can be very intimidating where few would chance a cross move towards me. So I normally don't need to go to physical hands on unless of course I'm dealing with a biting issue which is dealt with swiftly.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I think part of the reason is because nobody is given concrete examples. I'm not the only person who has asked on this thread, who has done it, and what level? A SchII dog who might have done the II at a Regional, Bob's dog Thunder and Shade's dog were the only 3 mentioned. Although a comment was made that Bob may have used some compulsion, and nobody has countered that, at least that I saw. I'd be curious if Shade will say that she has never applied compulsion to her dog.
> 
> Either way though, even if all 3 of those dogs have never seen compulsion, none of them are out winning at National or World events.
> 
> I wouldn't deny that dogs can be trained without compulsion, I'm sure it's true. But in what venue, and to what level, for me that's the question. If this technique was really successful, I think we'd see a lot more people using it. Reality is people want success, and will use whatever methods are going to get them there.


Kadi There have been concrete examples and a couple others post a schutzhund club that trains using this method. A whole club!!!!http://www.rwdc.org/index.htm 
Kadi go check it out for yourself see it with your our eyes.

Why does no one wants to accept that as fact. Once again the original question was can a dog be trained using only motivational training and the answer is yes. 
Several have come on here and said as much but that's not good enough for some on here.

Most people don't want to go to the nationals or world it take time and money to travel like that. You and I both it's hard to get some folks out to train on a regular. Not to mention everyone doesn't measures success in the same manner.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: We have gotten away from the original question which is can a dog be trained using motivational training only and the answer...YES!
> 
> To do what ? To sit ? to down ? What level of training ? Do I get to distract the dog ? You see where this gets real messy ?
> 
> Quote: Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it. Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition.
> 
> Ok, it has been at least 10 years that people have been doing this stuff. Where is all the success ? WHere did they all go ? You are starting to sound like on of the "raw" people whose eyes roll up in their head with religious ecstasy.
> 
> We were doing the "motivational" outs in the late 80's, early 90's.
> 
> How long does it take ? It is easy to sit there and say, "well, you are not good enough" and silly shit like that, but the bottom line is that this has been around for 20 years, or more, and where is this training at ? Where are all these trainers that SWEAR it can be done ?
> 
> How long to get your dogs BH ?? I mean really, how long ? That shit should take about 3 to 6 months. How long did it take you ?
> 
> Now lets back track that a bit more. If your dog gets a BH and it takes you 3 or 4 years, who in their right mind is going to stand up and be counted amongst those that want to waste their time ?
> 
> It really is very similar to bulldog people in the sport. They all point to that one or two that did something. There are more of them out there that are getting titles, but that is more of the weaker nature of the sport than of bulldogs excellence. Kinda like the posi only training. There are one or two that have done something, but you don't see them on here defending it. One I think was quoted as having a FR1. wow.


My male was ready for a BH at 2yrs of age and my female was about 2 -2 1/2 years old. This was not because of training method but rate of maturity. As to the number of ABs in competition that is more of a reflection on the and not the dog's ability. Most bulldoggers are not into competition. But the ones that are have been successful I'm sorry you personally owned a couple dubs.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> So:
> 
> 1) it takes too long
> 2) We search for certain traits in behavior and character which will make it harder if sometimes not impossible to get certain things done. . . Fair enough. What traits and what behavior that make what harder or impossible to get done.
> 
> _*Ok well some people are going to disagree with me but the moment that biting comes into play it starts getting a hell of a lot harder...there is no bigger reward for a dog in my area of training then bitework...traits like persistance, endurance, lighty flammable characters...things that come more natural to one breed then another...its simple fact that the moment that bitework comes into play..listening to the owner goes out the window for a large part...and then you can start over for a large part with getting the dog back to the level it was before bitework...it hasnt forgotten anything nooooo it just doesnt give a shit what you do at that point...the dog wants to bite and thats it...so you have to get it to let loose and start building at your obediance again...and some dogs will simply say KISS MY ASS..its all depening on the dog infront of you...
> 
> 
> *_
> 3) Have you ever tried any of this with such a dog? Where did it fall apart?
> 
> _*Somewhere in this topic i explained about a club that i visit once a month with my dog and how this club trains in the way refered to here...its a great club and ive known all the trainers for a hell of a long time...they train for fun tho...they dont really care about results...as soon as they feel the dog is exam ready they go and they dont care that they lose a lot of points or that the dog is flawed in areas since they keep the dog as a pet of sorts and like i said...its fun and nothing else for them...where did it fall appart ? by seeing 5+ years old dogs going for exams and barely making the exam to begin with..dogs that break obediance at every corner and basicly are just playing around on the field...
> 5+ years is to old for what i train them for and then im not even going to go into the obediance part
> 
> *_ 4) Define docile.
> 
> _*Gawd lol....lab's, st bernards... im sure there are a lot of docile breeds out there i just dont know all of them...lets say for arguments sake...dogs that wouldnt be used in most of the sports that you can find here on forum...and dogs that dont have to do bitework
> 
> If i want to do bitework i will pick a breed thats fit for that like the Mali/Dutchie/GSD and other breeds used...if i want to go ratting or cooning id get a patterdale or something else that does that kind of sports...if i want to have a dog do waterresque id get a newfie...get the idea ? every sports has its dog that fits the requirements...
> *_
> Just for the record, I don't have any religious zeal and I don't think one thing will necessarily work for all dogs. I'm still curious with the national/world type of dog if any one can specifically characterize this dog's mental make up that explains why any aspect of motivational training can't work. Alice is the only one that has come close.
> 
> Terrasita


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> I realize that but unlike the other methods you can't just say ok I'm going start off at the call off and expect it to work.
> Joby your dog does not understand that you are the giver of all there by controling it all...including his access to the helper the dog's ultimate reward. I know your dog doesn't know this because you said the he will engage helper regardless.
> 
> This method is all about laying foundation. Just like building a house. You can't put the roof or walls up until a sturdy solid foundation is laid.
> when I start a dog/pup I will not move forward until the dog has mastered the first lesson...which is I am the most important thing on the field. Regards as to what else is going on around us. After this I will incorporate other things as rewards. Like say the dog/pup wants to engage the other members who are looking on. I will ask for a behavior mark it and give the people as a reward. After dog spends a few seconds with them I call him back and we continue on with the lesson.
> The way I train is more then just letting the dog know he's right. It also teaches the dog to always be tuned in to me. It develops a mental line to him...gives me a way into his head. This you have to teach or condition as you gradually turn the dog's drives completely loose.
> As with all methods the bar is always moving higher.


 you ignored pretty much all the questions I took the time to type...So I guess I am done...

I said the dog will engage the helper regardless if he has a sleeve, suit, or NO equipment, so hiding the equipment is not an option, the dog will bite FOR REAL, if no equipment is in the picture...not that the dog engages anyway regardless of what I want...so the removal of the reward is not an option, unless someone is willing to get bit..

I am not sure what type of dogs you are training....but there are plenty of dogs out there, that are WAY different in their attitudes, desires, etc..than your dog(s).

To say these methods will work with any dog in any venue, is SILLY. and naive....

It appears that it can work with some dogs, so far I have only heard about SCH dogs...

And everyone who is in SCH that I know, and have asked, agrees it can be done...

But they also ALL disagreed that it can be done in the sport of SCH with EVERY dog. 

so SOME SCH dogs, is a far cry from ALL dogs, regardless of venue...which is what you said...


----------



## Candy Eggert

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
Lynda you are passionate in your beliefs about training motivationally that work for you and some others. But I do remember reading somewhere on this forum that you've only put a Bh on one maybe two dogs?! Please correct me if I'm wrong here. I'd like to know how your actual experience compares here. Here's the trouble, you are speaking down to trainers who have a hell of a lot of experience and success at high levels using their methods. And for most of us it's a combination of both motivational and compulsion. 

Your message would probably be more well received if one, you had some experience (actual) to back up your claims. Two, stop acting like no one else knows how to train a dog if it's not with a cookie and clicker. Three, attacking trainers who train differently than you do, who have results to back up their words. 

Here's an example. We all pretty much know that Mike Ellis is a motivational trainer, except when he's not ;-)~ At a seminar I tell him I'm having issues with Rico at 8 months old being angry over outing. And I've worked this since he's been a pup. Exchanges for food, other toys, etc. At some point that crap has to stop and he needs to out because I tell him to. So Mike gets a tug, stands up tall (big guy) and tries to wait him out. You know all that motivational stuff?! Fighting, thrashing but oh hell no not letting go of that tug. 30 frigging minutes later the pup tires!! So what did Rico learn....? That he can possess it as long as thirty minutes and not have to let go. So much for motivational training with THIS dog! When he's corrected he bucks up (doesn't melt) and gives respect. I'm pretty sure it doesn't hurt his little feelings ;-) To say that the cookie and clicker method works for every dog is wrong. 

And here is where we part ways on training methods. I don't know about you but I like training things right the first time so that I don't have to waste time doing it over. Big time killer for me. I have commented before on how much I like Rook's upbeat attitude but this is correct healing via your motivational training?! Perhaps we have differing views on what is correct? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GXdNNB8iMA


----------



## Candy Eggert

The quote feature isn't working but may I say "Amen sistah":lol::lol::lol:


_*Ok well some people are going to disagree with me but the moment that biting comes into play it starts getting a hell of a lot harder...there is no bigger reward for a dog in my area of training then bitework...traits like persistance, endurance, lighty flammable characters...things that come more natural to one breed then another...its simple fact that the moment that bitework comes into play..listening to the owner goes out the window for a large part...and then you can start over for a large part with getting the dog back to the level it was before bitework...it hasnt forgotten anything nooooo it just doesnt give a shit what you do at that point...the dog wants to bite and thats it...so you have to get it to let loose and start building at your obediance again...and some dogs will simply say KISS MY ASS..its all depening on the dog infront of you...*_


----------



## Guest

Lynda Myers said:


> My male was ready for a BH at 2yrs of age and my female was about 2 -2 1/2 years old. This was not because of training method but rate of maturity. As to the number of ABs in competition that is more of a reflection on the and not the dog's ability. Most bulldoggers are not into competition. But the ones that are have been successful I'm sorry you personally owned a couple dubs.


 
How do you know the majority aren't into competitions? You run a poll? And even if you did, for you to say that is ignorant. You claim it can be done and disagree with the majority of the posters on here asking legit questions.....Maybe you need to look left and right and enjoy the scenery every now and then? Tunnel vision will make you crash!!!

Question? Litter of pups (you pick the breed), one goes to you and one goes to me... you train pure motivational your way you know how and have expressed, I train with whatever method I want, MY WAY! What's the outcome in lets say.....aawww your sport? At two years of age? At three? 

BTW, I am a hobbyist and not a trainer......


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> If you assume the 1% dog has a rogue mentality that puts him in a mental place that the handler can't influence then that is what you are gonna get. He was conditioned for all that you mention. You might want to condition him for his relationship with his handler. If you start with force then that is what you have and all the baggage that can come with it. All I've seen so far is an ASSUMPTION that this 1% dog can only benefit from force. Nor have you established that hese 1% dogs are ALL highly competitive at the national and world levels. There is a category of dogs that play for real and they don't make the best sport dogs no matter how you train them because they aren't mentally wired for games and the force is never so conditioned that the dog doesn't become ringwise. I'm not one to get into games and aggression for show in an artificial sport setting. I'm usually more interested in what law enforcement needs on the street and maybe some of Suttle's military applications. I'll refer you to some Jim Nash's post on the usefulness of marker training with his dog. Again, this is about teaching a behavior. If you have already conditioned the dog that he can bite when he wants and you are not the source of the bite, then you are gonna have problems. If you have a relationship where you are not in his head when he is in bite/fight gaga land, you won't be able to reach him there and all you can hope for is that he won't run through your collar. There is a type of dog that will say, to hell with the correction, I'll suffer the consequences or they are so far gone, they don't feel anything. He'll fight with you on the same level he'll fight with that decoy. Its just keeps escalating where you can put that collar to influence him. You want to argue the impossibility before you have even tried it. All you can do as a handler is take your 1% dog and say I'm going to start out with teaching a behavior with markers instead of I'm going to have to force him into simple behaviors like sit and down.
> 
> I spectated at a PSA trial. It was interesting to listen to a couple of the exhibitors state that had they not worked with marker based training and the Balabanov game with the dogs since puppyhood, they would never have an out. All the talk of where to place the collar because if he thinks it came from the decoy, he don't give a damn. What about those who use pain to amp or dogs that naturally amp from pain. Is this really what you want to start with and the CONFUSION. Lots of vehement objections over something you haven't set out to try to see if it works. If someone says it has worked for him then ohhhh, it must not be a hard dog or it must not be a really drivey dog. Or, it only worked on the club field and with the club decoy. Again, assumptions. There are plenty of dogs out there trained without a marker or positive reinforcement system that are club dogs. They knew from jump street they were going to be club only dogs. Character and nerves are something different from training. Whether that dog is specific or more of a generalist and you have trained with that in regard is also another story. Until you have worked from the beginning that the bite is the reward and you are the source of the reward, then it is all just theory. The naysayers are the ones that have those special dogs that they don't think it can work for. Someone that knows how to work with the theory needs to experiment with one of those 1% from the cradle. Otherwise it continues as a verbal volleyball exercise.
> 
> Terrasita


It does and can work for SOME dogs for SOME things..IT WILL NOT WORK WITH ALL DOGS FOR ALL THINGS. there are plenty of dogs out there to test the theories on...

I use marker training, and as much positive as my dog allows me to, I am not against it at all....just strongly disagree that it can be done with every dog for everything....


----------



## maggie fraser

Lynda Myers said:


> Maggie where's the inconsistency in that...there is manners and then there's training for competition. On the training field and/or training sessions it's all positive. besides I don't let bad habits or behaviors get a foot hold I deal with it before it becomes a real problem there by requiring little correction.
> But when you say good ole' compulsion trust me don't pull out the whips, chains pinch and/or e-collars. Most of it is done with body pressure and threat. When I want to I can be very intimidating where few would chance a cross move towards me. So I normally don't need to go to physical hands on unless of course I'm dealing with a biting issue which is dealt with swiftly.


 
Lynda, you have been making reference to purely motivational training here, I regard house training and manners as training, it may not be competition training, but it is still training and in addition I think I do it by motivational means. I don't do it like that because I am trying to prove a point to anyone or even myself, it is just me and how I do some things, I've spent quite a lot of time with beasts on my Jack Jones.


That's what I meant by inconsistency, I'm in neither camp, I don't believe either side have the monopoly on the truth, at least not yet. I don't see why you would want/strive to train purely motivationally if you do not possess the same ethic from the getgo.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> We have gotten away from the original question which is can a dog be trained using motivational training only and the answer...YES!
> All the other replies reflect peoples personally feelings, preferences, and own life experiences.
> Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it. Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition.
> It amazes me that so many believe there aren't people out that can in deed carry it out successfully. Why is that? Is it just because you personally haven't done it or those your acquainted with it haven't? I never realized until right now just how closed minded most of you are.
> 
> Need I remind you that had that same closed minded thinking stopped people like Christopher Columbus, Wright Brothers, Thomas Edison etc. by listening to the nay sayers instead of following their own mind our world as we know it would be vastly different.
> Again the question was can it be done? Not how many people are doing, will you use it, or why won't it work? It was CAN IT BE DONE and the answer it YES!!!!!! Like it or not the answer is still YES!!!!
> 
> Ok I get it most won't train this way good, great, fine by me. So please stop coming here spewing all your negative BS. Highjacking every thread on motivational training with it. There are people who truly want to know more about method and all your doing is hindering the flow of information between them.
> 
> If you refer to my response below to Martine you will see that I'm wanting to put your popular belief to the test.
> 
> 
> I often have a conversation with a friend regarding Mals and Dutchies being trained using the method I currently use. as most everyone says it can't be done and that you must use a pinch and e-collar if you ever hope to accomplished anything with the dog competition wise. I personally don't believe it's true and am now researching kennels and bloodlines for a nice dutchie. So as to test the theory and if it is as everyone says will be the first to concede to the fact. But until then must go on what my own personal life experiences have bared out.


Looks at Mike's pups some time, He should have what you are looking for to test the theory in a strong non-sporty type Arko or Carlos pup...prefferably a nice non-sporty type male out of a litter from Carlos bred to an Arko daughter...mike can pick out the sporties vs. the non sporties for ya...make sure you get the driviest male in the litter.
or look for a comparable "non-sporty" type.from other breeders, if you are going to try to prove something, take the hard road...if you take the easy road it proves nothing....

breed doesn't really matter, it's the temperament that matters...there are plenty of dutchies and mals you can buy that will prove you right in your mind...but that will still not mean it can be done with any dog...which is why I jumped into this one..


Terrisita and Lynda..

I do use marker training, and reward based training for OB..And for certain areas in the bite work, but also firmly believe that corrections are necessary with this dog for certain things. jeff might be right and I don;t have a clue,but I do stand behind this.

I guess I am done here on this one...it was stated as fact that it can be done with ANY dog...regardless of any variables....PROVE IT.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I've read all the posts and I agree that there is a way to do Schutzhund on purely motivational methods. This I have read but not experienced, BTW.

Candy, couldn't agree more with you.

The dogs that we mostly buy from in Switzerland (I bought mine in Germany) have been bred to bite, but when you breed to bite and fight, you breed other traits into the dog as well, such as determination to get its own way (novice description I know), athleticisim, confidence (hopefully).

My breeder / decoy tested our older dog at 9 months and found him rather aggressive so didn't pursue the issue.

I am absolutely certain that, had I said I wanted to train this dog purely motivationally, he would have sent me from the arena, mostly because he bred these dogs to bite and fight and the danger of someone believing they could control their dog just positively would have made him reject them.

Alice mentioned "docile" dogs for want of a better description. I couldn't give you one at hand.

I never met any "docile" dogs, or, if they appeared, like a Rhodesian Ridgeback, the decoy said he would try him out but couldn't guarantee the outcome. Outocome: nil. Fair decision.

In my opinion, by the time you developed the dog through purely positive development, you have either a dog that does a passable Schutzdienst or have to face the fact that you have missed out when the dog shows around 24 months that he wants to bite come what may.

I didn't use compuslion for the out as I trained it from puppy age but the youger dog that outed well, did not think he had to out on the sleeve. It's all in the stars when you begin. Sometimes the harder dog outs easily and the weaker doesns't.

I defy anyone to tell me how it will turn out. But, with just motivational training, I could hit BS and then I'm the sucker!


----------



## Joby Becker

Jody Butler said:


> How do you know the majority aren't into competitions? You run a poll? And even if you did, for you to say that is ignorant. You claim it can be done and disagree with the majority of the posters on here asking legit questions.....Maybe you need to look left and right and enjoy the scenery every now and then? Tunnel vision will make you crash!!!
> 
> Question? Litter of pups (you pick the breed), one goes to you and one goes to me... you train pure motivational your way you know how and have expressed, I train with whatever method I want, MY WAY! What's the outcome in lets say.....aawww your sport? At two years of age? At three?
> 
> BTW, I am a hobbyist and not a trainer......


Let me pick..Dutchie X

Carlos bred to strong Arko daughter, 2 very strong non-sport type Males..(or comparable)

.let the PROOF come to light and prove everyone wrong...


----------



## Martine Loots

@ Alice:

Too much effort to start quoting all yr posts but "I agree" "I agree" "I agree"


----------



## Joby Becker

Martine...research is being done to prove this theory, can you assist in finding the RIGHT dog that will prove once and for all if this can be done with EVERY dog? a VERY strong non-sporty type male please.
Thanks in advance...


----------



## Martine Loots

Candy Eggert said:


> Lynda you are passionate in your beliefs about training motivationally that work for you and some others. But I do remember reading somewhere on this forum that you've only put a Bh on one maybe two dogs?! Please correct me if I'm wrong here. I'd like to know how your actual experience compares here. Here's the trouble, you are speaking down to trainers who have a hell of a lot of experience and success at high levels using their methods. And for most of us it's a combination of both motivational and compulsion.
> 
> Your message would probably be more well received if one, you had some experience (actual) to back up your claims. Two, stop acting like no one else knows how to train a dog if it's not with a cookie and clicker. Three, attacking trainers who train differently than you do, who have results to back up their words.


Amen to that hehe!

p.s. Candy, "quoting" works... :mrgreen:\\/


----------



## Joby Becker

@Alice....if dogs DID die on the field in your venue, which would be more likely to be the cause in your opinion? the dogs die from being corrected to death, or they die cause they break their neck or spine in a reckless attack?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Lynda Myers said:


> Don don't talk to me about dogs been good in the house when the majority of your's are untrained and kenneled several to a pen. Whether I crate or leave out is personal preference and has nothing to do with whether or not their trained.


Just recollecting what was said about you wouldn't leave your dogs unsupervised. At least the ones I have in the house can be left alone all day. Sounds like you have some that would be better of as outside dogs. LOL Your really reaching here Lynda, talking about my dogs being kenneled together. They are yarded together in 1/4 acre yards and most know that. Besides, what I am pointing out is that you have no control over what a dog does when you are not present with rewards and treats. Now there is a big difference, according to you, in training for competition and teaching basic manners. Are you saying straight up, you can't teach dogs manners using motivational methods??? It is limited in it's uses??? Just admit that it is only good for as long as you are there with treats or rewards. I actually use it myself which was pointed out to you before. I use it for quick trick training to get a litter of pups to all sit in unison. Just takes a few minutes and that is why I like it for some things. They just won't do it unless they know I have a treat and yes, they sniff my hand and pockets to make sure.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Jody Butler said:


> How do you know the majority aren't into competitions? You run a poll? And even if you did, for you to say that is ignorant. You claim it can be done and disagree with the majority of the posters on here asking legit questions.....Maybe you need to look left and right and enjoy the scenery every now and then? Tunnel vision will make you crash!!!
> 
> Question? Litter of pups (you pick the breed), one goes to you and one goes to me... you train pure motivational your way you know how and have expressed, I train with whatever method I want, MY WAY! What's the outcome in lets say.....aawww your sport? At two years of age? At three?
> 
> BTW, I am a hobbyist and not a trainer......


Joby the majority of AB oners aren't into organized dog sports.

Joby, Hell with hypothetical let's do it with dutchies. as far as sport the only choices I have here are Schutzhund and PSA. You can pick the sport. We will start with young pups.

Try to stay on track the original question was can a dog be trained using motivational training only and once again the answer is yes. 
I did answer the questions people didn't like or agree with the answers given.:wink:


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Joby the majority of AB oners aren't into organized dog sports.
> 
> Joby, Hell with hypothetical let's do it with dutchies. as far as sport the only choices I have here are Schutzhund and PSA. You can pick the sport. We will start with young pups.
> 
> Try to stay on track the original question was can a dog be trained using motivational training only and once again the answer is yes.
> I did answer the questions people didn't like or agree with the answers given.:wink:


I pick the litter and the dogs?


----------



## Konnie Hein

I think there's a big difference between training with no corrections for Schutzhund, and trying to do the same for FR, especially when talking about a dog who gets lost in the fight. 

I would like to know how a handler would go about training the out and recall off a decoy with no corrections, when the dog tends to get lost in the fight, and the decoy has the freedom to get the dog to that point (such as in the sport of FR). I have a dog like that, and I just can't see how it can be done, especially since this dog didn't have an out at all when I bought him at 10 months of age. 

I added this picture to show the frame of mind of this dog when the decoy ramps him up...


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> you ignored pretty much all the questions I took the time to type...So I guess I am done...
> 
> I said the dog will engage the helper regardless if he has a sleeve, suit, or NO equipment, so hiding the equipment is not an option, the dog will bite FOR REAL, if no equipment is in the picture...not that the dog engages anyway regardless of what I want...so the removal of the reward is not an option, unless someone is willing to get bit..
> 
> I am not sure what type of dogs you are training....but there are plenty of dogs out there, that are WAY different in their attitudes, desires, etc..than your dog(s).
> 
> To say these methods will work with any dog in any venue, is SILLY. and naive....
> 
> It appears that it can work with some dogs, so far I have only heard about SCH dogs...
> 
> And everyone who is in SCH that I know, and have asked, agrees it can be done...
> 
> But they also ALL disagreed that it can be done in the sport of SCH with EVERY dog.
> 
> so SOME SCH dogs, is a far cry from ALL dogs, regardless of venue...which is what you said...


I answered you, you either didn't like the answer or didn't understand what I wrote. Point blank you are not in your dog's head. As I outlined above. This is how I start any dog I personally train. You don't so for me to explain how you should train YOUR DOG using the way I train will not work. Because the dog has gone to kindergarten yet.
Sorry!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Mr Internet Mondio Ring Expert is critisizing a Sch Dobermann dabbling in MR for a 36/100 score

Jago was not a Sch dog. You were training regularly with us. We told you how many times not to trial ? You knew better. Just like when Mike Ellis chewed your ass. You had just been to one of his seminars, and still you knew better. You ran off to Sch after that like a little girl.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> I pick the litter and the dogs?


No thank you I'll pick my own pup you might try to fix me up with a nerve bag cur. Unless of course your going to foot the bill then by all means have your way and pick the pup for me.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Joby Becker said:


> @Alice....if dogs DID die on the field in your venue, which would be more likely to be the cause in your opinion? the dogs die from being corrected to death, or they die cause they break their neck or spine in a reckless attack?


I would have to say injury's that might occur during the attack ? like a spinal injury or neck injury or being reckless in its attack...or healthissues that are unknown upto that point ?

I had a Dutchiecross that was 28 months old...ready for exam in 4 months...never showed a gddamn problem healthwise...never got sick..strong as a horse...xrays were perfect!

Thursday evening i stand in the lane ready to send this dog for the Stickattack...it goes...it bites...it holds on...it falls of and is knock out! everyone runs up to check the dog...took 20 minutes for it to come back...gums and tongue blue as the ocean...slowly he got back to his feet and we went straight to the vets to have it checked...vet couldnt find nothing...come back tomorow for Xrays and testing, we go back friday, head xrays chest xrays, bloodworks, dog is fine...shows nothing, vet asks to check dog out on the field across from the vet hospital...nothing shows, dog is fine, bloodwork is fine...they send us to utrecht to the vetrinairy university...more checks and xrays and bloodwork and again nothing comes up so we have a sit down after 4 days and we go over the events at the field....now apparantly when the dog passed out i started massaging its throat...its a habit i created from my yorkie who had inverted sneezing and YES I HAD A YORKIE ! lol and that explained a lot to them...the did a laryngoscope and ran some tests and bingo...the dog had larynxspasms since some of the muscles and nerves in his throath didnt work correctly...was told never to work the dog again since it could happen over over and over and this time due to the massage i got the airway open by shear luck and nothing else...next time i wouldnt be so lucky...contacted breeder and 2 more littermates had the same wrong working muscle and nerv system in their throat...so he could have died that day without me knowing he was even sick to start with...its one of the scenarios in which i can imagine it could happen but i doubt seriously that it would be due to handlercorrection....inspite of what some think about doghandlers...we may be tough on our dogs and we dont take bullshit from them...we dont smash them across the field either and we dont push them to their extremes...


sorry bout the bloody long answer LOL


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Just maybe a daft English/Swiss interjection - when we have a dog as in Konnie's picture, happens in Schutzhund, too, BTW, we, as so-called "non-positive" dog trainers (?) have the answers. Do you, as purely positive motivated trainers?


----------



## Doug Zaga

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: Mr Internet Mondio Ring Expert is critisizing a Sch Dobermann dabbling in MR for a 36/100 score
> 
> Jago was not a Sch dog. You were training regularly with us. We told you how many times not to trial ? You knew better. Just like when Mike Ellis chewed your ass. You had just been to one of his seminars, and still you knew better. You ran off to Sch after that like a little girl.


 
:neutral:


----------



## maggie fraser

Lynda Myers said:


> No thank you I'll pick my own pup you might try to fix me up with a nerve bag cur. Unless of course your going to foot the bill then by all means have your way and pick the pup for me.


 
What if all forum members were to chip in a pound or two....a poll on the litter and pup....regualr vid updates on the project ?


----------



## Joby Becker

You responding to me or JODY, who has posed the hypethitical challenge to you...

I have never claimed to be great, and have I think proven that I am NOT great LOL...This is not about me or my dog(s), this is about you stating things as facts when they are theories...

I have never titled a dog, and have little time to work on titling the one I have...it appears JODY has the time..maybe 

I responded only to your comments about ANY dog for ANY venue...which is plain stupidity...I saw some dogs recently that would be beyond comprehension to some people, even ones that own dutchies and mals and train them. I am a pretty good judge of dogs, I am sure I can help find one that would give you a run for your money.

I would be more than happy to be involved in the selection of the dog for your research..

The question is how would you prove you never corrected the dog? a 24 hr video feed on the dog?


----------



## Lynda Myers

Don Turnipseed said:


> Just recollecting what was said about you wouldn't leave your dogs unsupervised. At least the ones I have in the house can be left alone all day. Sounds like you have some that would be better of as outside dogs. LOL Your really reaching here Lynda, talking about my dogs being kenneled together. They are yarded together in 1/4 acre yards and most know that. Besides, what I am pointing out is that you have no control over what a dog does when you are not present with rewards and treats. Now there is a big difference, according to you, in training for competition and teaching basic manners. Are you saying straight up, you can't teach dogs manners using motivational methods??? It is limited in it's uses??? Just admit that it is only good for as long as you are there with treats or rewards. I actually use it myself which was pointed out to you before. I use it for quick trick training to get a litter of pups to all sit in unison. Just takes a few minutes and that is why I like it for some things. They just won't do it unless they know I have a treat and yes, they sniff my hand and pockets to make sure.


Whatever Don your like cur that comes in for a bite on hind leg while the real dog is working business end of the quarry. LOL 
No Don you use treats to lure and placed thats a far cry from what I do.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> No thank you I'll pick my own pup you might try to fix me up with a nerve bag cur. Unless of course your going to foot the bill then by all means have your way and pick the pup for me.


I assure that would not be the pup I would pick, he would be much easier to work with with your methods...I was leaning WAY the other way..I named the type of dog that I feel would prove that you can do it, and to prove you could do it with ANY dog, it would have to be a dog that you did not hand pick to prove your own theories...

to prove your theories you need to find the dog that would be among the hardest to train using your methods...I am sure there are some people on here that have or can find these types of dogs for you besides me. to be more fair..and you of course have to prove that you never corrected the dog..

some that come to mind 

Alice
Chris Jones
Mike Suttle
Jody B.
Martine
Dick
Selena
Rick Rutt
and plenty of others, too many to name...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: This was not because of training method but rate of maturity

Never heard of that causing a delay in titling in OB. Think maybe it was the method of training ?

Quote: I would like to know how a handler would go about training the out and recall off a decoy with no corrections, when the dog tends to get lost in the fight, and the decoy has the freedom to get the dog to that point (such as in the sport of FR). I have a dog like that, and I just can't see how it can be done, especially since this dog didn't have an out at all when I bought him at 10 months of age. 

Of course you ****ed it up Konnie, if positive doesn't work, it is all your fault, and you suck as a trainer. It is just how it is. Matter of fact, the only ones that don't suck, are positive trainers according to Lynda. LOL

Terrafirmasita. Konnie is showing you a good example of what you would be seeing if you tried to use positive methods on some dogs. Just look at the picture, and occasionally, shake the computer.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> You responding to me or JODY, who has posed the hypethitical challenge to you...
> 
> I have never claimed to be great, and have I think proven that I am NOT great LOL...This is not about me or my dog(s), this is about you stating things as facts when they are theories...
> 
> I have never titled a dog, and have little time to work on titling the one I have...it appears JODY has the time..maybe
> 
> I responded only to your comments about ANY dog for ANY venue...which is plain stupidity...I saw some dogs recently that would be beyond comprehension to some people, even ones that own dutchies and mals and train them. I am a pretty good judge of dogs, I am sure I can help find one that would give you a run for your money.
> 
> I would be more than happy to be involved in the selection of the dog for your research..
> 
> The question is how would you prove you never corrected the dog? a 24 hr video feed on the dog?


Sorry on the name mix up. That isn't very practical. Why would I cheat isn't not that serious. Besides if i did it would skew the results and I truly am curious about whether it's true or not. So all I can say is they'll just have to trust me.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Sorry on the name mix up. That isn't very practical. Why would I cheat isn't not that serious. Besides if i did it would skew the results and I truly am curious about whether it's true or not. So all I can say is they'll just have to trust me.


I am not sure if Jody was serious or just egging you on....even if he wasn;t serious you should try it by yourself...

Ok. fair enough..I could trust you...now just agree to a poll on the dog and the litter, since you don't trust me to find a good dog far ya...as suggested from others..

.to go out and hand pick a "dutchie" is not proving anything in regards to your statements about ANY dog. some dogs have far more desire to FIGHT than others...


----------



## Lynda Myers

maggie fraser said:


> What if all forum members were to chip in a pound or two....a poll on the litter and pup....regualr vid updates on the project ?


That sounds fair enough maybe weekly or bi-weekly videos.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

ehmmmm...how do i put this...the outcome or result of this test would still not matter...one dog does not the whole breed or dogsociety make 

she can train one her way and it could work or it could fail and still it would say absolutly nothing...yes it would say it could be done or no it couldnt be done with that particular dog...but that dog doesnt represent the entire dogpopulation so the outcome would be of no consequence....


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> I assure that would not be the pup I would pick, he would be much easier to work with with your methods...I was leaning WAY the other way..I named the type of dog that I feel would prove that you can do it, and to prove you could do it with ANY dog, it would have to be a dog that you did not hand pick to prove your own theories...
> 
> to prove your theories you need to find the dog that would be among the hardest to train using your methods...I am sure there are some people on here that have or can find these types of dogs for you besides me. to be more fair..and you of course have to prove that you never corrected the dog..
> 
> some that come to mind
> 
> Alice
> Chris Jones
> Mike Suttle
> Jody B.
> Martine
> Dick
> Selena
> Rick Rutt
> and plenty of others, too many to name...


Joby I contacted Mike via e-mail about a year ago about acquiring a dog and never got a response.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Gillian Schuler said:


> Just maybe a daft English/Swiss interjection - when we have a dog as in Konnie's picture, happens in Schutzhund, too, BTW, we, as so-called "non-positive" dog trainers (?) have the answers. Do you, as purely positive motivated trainers?


Can I have an answer?


----------



## Joby Becker

you have a lot of doubters on here....Everyone from different venues and different countries...

if it is to be a dutchie or dutchie X that should narrow the possiblities down...Don't think anyone is going to buy your dog for ya, but I think everyone doubting you would love to see you fail...and would most likely take the time to give input on the selection of the dog...and I believe that all the doubters are on the same page about not finding you a nervy cur shitter...(which would make your job easier)...


----------



## Joby Becker

Alice Bezemer said:


> ehmmmm...how do i put this...the outcome or result of this test would still not matter...one dog does not the whole breed or dogsociety make
> 
> she can train one her way and it could work or it could fail and still it would say absolutly nothing...yes it would say it could be done or no it couldnt be done with that particular dog...but that dog doesnt represent the entire dogpopulation so the outcome would be of no consequence....


poo poo on you Alice  LOL yer no fun...


----------



## Mary Buck

Alice Bezemer said:


> ehmmmm...how do i put this...the outcome or result of this test would still not matter...one dog does not the whole breed or dogsociety make
> 
> she can train one her way and it could work or it could fail and still it would say absolutly nothing...yes it would say it could be done or no it couldnt be done with that particular dog...but that dog doesnt represent the entire dogpopulation so the outcome would be of no consequence....


Yep ! Spot on with that statement .


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: but I think everyone doubting you would love to see you fail.

I don't want to see you fail Lynda. It is a cool way to get a new dog. When I have a litter again, you can get Joby to buy one for you and you can train it positive. I should have a litter of GSD pups ready next feb.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Gillian Schuler said:


> Can I have an answer?


Thanks, Gillian! I would like an answer too. In light of no answer, I'll just assume that there is no way to do it without using corrections.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

First decoy holds still, you do about 50 laps with a Jambierre screaming your head off swinging it over your head till he bites it.

Every time after that should get shorter for you. I figure you will be ready for a marathon AND have a great positive out.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

That method does work by the way. ****ing brutal, but it does work.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Candy Eggert said:


> And here is where we part ways on training methods. I don't know about you but I like training things right the first time so that I don't have to waste time doing it over. Big time killer for me. I have commented before on how much I like Rook's upbeat attitude but this is correct healing via your motivational training?! Perhaps we have differing views on what is correct?
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GXdNNB8iMA


Candy - I just now had the chance to watch this vid. I don't know much about what's correct for Schutzhund heeling (aside from watching trials and vids), so can you point out what's incorrect? I'm assuming the dog isn't supposed to crab its rear end out away from the handler so much. What else? 

Then if Lynda or somebody else could talk about how to fix those issues while not using any corrections, that would be great.


----------



## maggie fraser

Alice Bezemer said:


> ehmmmm...how do i put this...the outcome or result of this test would still not matter...one dog does not the whole breed or dogsociety make
> 
> she can train one her way and it could work or it could fail and still it would say absolutly nothing...yes it would say it could be done or no it couldnt be done with that particular dog...but that dog doesnt represent the entire dogpopulation so the outcome would be of no consequence....


I dunno, I think it could be quite interesting particularly come bite time, I'm sure there could be scenarios later on by different decoys that could put the training to the test to a satisfaction, and could prove at least it was possible with a dog many would deem very challenging.

As for one dog representing the dog population as a whole...well folks have been taking this to the sublime here, there just isn't anyone on here who suggests otherwise really ? Is there ? We've been talking blanket term here if I'm correct, folks have been enjoying the scrap too much.


----------



## Joby Becker

Konnie Hein said:


> I think there's a big difference between training with no corrections for Schutzhund, and trying to do the same for FR, especially when talking about a dog who gets* lost in the fight.*
> 
> I would like to know how a handler would go about training the out and recall off a decoy with no corrections, when the dog tends to get lost in the fight, and the decoy has the freedom to get the dog to that point (such as in the sport of FR). I have a dog like that, and I just can't see how it can be done, especially since this dog didn't have an out at all when I bought him at 10 months of age.
> 
> I added this picture to show the frame of mind of this dog when the decoy ramps him up...


Basically what I was asking...was first told it starts when it is a young pup, then was told it can work with an older dog too, just might be slower...
I think anyone who uses corrections can come up with an answer, but have not heard the ANSWER from the non-corrective people
I too have been searching for this answer. What about this dog?
ring or no ring
http://www.workingdogforum.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=1387&goto=next&c=8


----------



## Candy Eggert

Martine Loots said:


> Amen to that hehe!
> 
> p.s. Candy, "quoting" works... :mrgreen:\\/


Fine Martine....it must be me and my dang computer this morning


----------



## Konnie Hein

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> That method does work by the way. ****ing brutal, but it does work.


Are you saying I need to run more???? It's true. I do! I've run a couple of marathons though, and frankly, I plan to avoid doing it again at all costs.


----------



## Joby Becker

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: but I think everyone doubting you would love to see you fail.
> 
> I don't want to see you fail Lynda. It is a cool way to get a new dog. When I have a litter again, you can get Joby to buy one for you and you can train it positive. I should have a litter of GSD pups ready next feb.


I would trust Jeff's judgement on a dog to "challenge" the theories,but am not buying a dog for ya...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Are you saying I need to run more????

Just the training method requires it. Your husband would have to tell you if you need to run more. So, again, it is the training method that requires the running. 

When you get to the point where the out is fast and beautiful, you will have to proof it with an e-collar LOL

Buko was like that. It went away when he was 4 pretty much. Just so you have an idea about the time. Before then, he could go to LA LA land and wow. I remember that shit.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Joby Becker said:


> What about this dog?
> ring or no ring
> http://www.workingdogforum.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=1387&goto=next&c=8


I'm telling ya right now that I would not want to be the one to run around with the jambierre screaming my head off in order to get this dog to out! :-o


----------



## Joby Becker

Konnie Hein said:


> I'm telling ya right now that I would not want to be the one to run around with the jambierre screaming my head off in order to get this dog to out! :-o


it might just work....who knows....that maybe could get the out ONCE....


but what instills it to be permanent...?

but in your case what happens when the decoy does what he does to impede the outs in ring, especially if he knows the dog is a real fighter?


----------



## Konnie Hein

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Just the training method requires it. Your husband would have to tell you if you need to run more. So, again, it is the training method that requires the running.


I'm not sure I'd get an "honest" answer from him on that!



> When you get to the point where the out is fast and beautiful, you will have to proof it with an e-collar LOL
> 
> Buko was like that. It went away when he was 4 pretty much. Just so you have an idea about the time. Before then, he could go to LA LA land and wow. I remember that shit.


Good to know that there's hope for change! Only 2 more years to go.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Joby Becker said:


> poo poo on you Alice  LOL yer no fun...


I never claimed i was


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: I'm not sure I'd get an "honest" answer from him on that!

I'll tell you. LOL


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Candy Eggert said:


> Here's an example. We all pretty much know that Mike Ellis is a motivational trainer, except when he's not ;-)~ At a seminar I tell him I'm having issues with Rico at 8 months old being angry over outing. And I've worked this since he's been a pup. Exchanges for food, other toys, etc. At some point that crap has to stop and he needs to out because I tell him to. So Mike gets a tug, stands up tall (big guy) and tries to wait him out. You know all that motivational stuff?! Fighting, thrashing but oh hell no not letting go of that tug. 30 frigging minutes later the pup tires!! So what did Rico learn....? That he can possess it as long as thirty minutes and not have to let go. So much for motivational training with THIS dog! When he's corrected he bucks up (doesn't melt) and gives respect. I'm pretty sure it doesn't hurt his little feelings ;-) To say that the cookie and clicker method works for every dog is wrong.
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Well I watched Steve Petit do the same thing with a bitch while we all watched and it was probably longer with her ball on a rope. That was the start of breaking down the resistance and cleaning up the out. All that next transferred to her sleeve work. She had all the other type of training. She just held on longer and fought harder. When you go through this process, it doesn't teach the dog to fight for 30 minutes necessarily and it may take more than 1 session but with that particular bitch it was the beginning of turning her around. Oh and she wasn't docile either.
> 
> Terrasita


----------



## Candy Eggert

Konnie Hein said:


> Candy - I just now had the chance to watch this vid. I don't know much about what's correct for Schutzhund heeling (aside from watching trials and vids), so can you point out what's incorrect? I'm assuming the dog isn't supposed to crab its rear end out away from the handler so much. What else?
> 
> Then if Lynda or somebody else could talk about how to fix those issues while not using any corrections, that would be great.


Hi Konnie,

Lynda's dog is heeling half way across her body in front. Being the klutz I am I'd be tripping over him. Besides being incorrect for Schutzhund heeling, he's obviously likely looking for his toy on her right side because that's where he's been rewarded :roll: What you accept you train. The dog's chest should be paralell with your left knee and not impede her movement. 

That's one of the problems I see with this video. This could have been trained motivationally and correctly](*,) They are not mutually exclusive. IMO she will now have to go back and work HARDER to get this dog back in proper position and working there correctly. 

If that was my dog I would go back to square one. Heeling isn't about movement, it's about correct position with the leg. Not even moving in a heeling pattern but strictly teaching the dog where correct position is before even adding movement. Correct position reward with a toy or food.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Konnie Hein said:


> Candy - I just now had the chance to watch this vid. I don't know much about what's correct for Schutzhund heeling (aside from watching trials and vids), so can you point out what's incorrect? I'm assuming the dog isn't supposed to crab its rear end out away from the handler so much. What else?
> 
> Then if Lynda or somebody else could talk about how to fix those issues while not using any corrections, that would be great.


now i have sweet fk all clue about the heeling in SCHH but that looked like a dog hindring its owner...

it would not be acceptable heeling in my eyes and i would want the dog at my site and not trying to step on my toes every time it put its feet down...but thats my point of view and it comes from KNPV and not SCHH


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: but I think everyone doubting you would love to see you fail.
> 
> I don't want to see you fail Lynda. It is a cool way to get a new dog. When I have a litter again, you can get Joby to buy one for you and you can train it positive. I should have a litter of GSD pups ready next feb.


Hahahah. If a GSD shows up at Lambert, I might have to fight her for it; especially if its a bitch. Please don't send a mal in a GSD suit though.

Terrasita


----------



## David Frost

Lynda Myers said:


> Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field? I ask because that's what I was told by good source. So was curious to know if it's true. If it is wow that speaks volumes of the intelligence of those doing the training over there and we all otto follow suit huh? It would confirm for me what I have always wondered about...that their breeding dogs so high up in drive and hardness just to have a dog left after the training is completed. I mean what's a couple dead dogs among club members right?
> Yet let's all get on that band wagon shall we! ;-)


I know I'm not involved in sport, but I reckon I've been involved with about as high a drive dogs and most on this board. One of the reasons I started posting on a more "pet" related board was because of ignorant comments such as the one about dogs dying during training. That and a percieved attitude, of what's a dog among trainers. Comments were often made about the exclusive use of aversives and physical corrections. Folks had "heard" all the horror stories and of course readily believed them because it fit their way of thinking. I've trained high drive dogs for a number of years. I've had one die during drug training. He ate 10 grams of heroin and died before we got him to a vet. I had one die during a track. We were over a mile into a track, in Texas, in August. I was the handler, so yes it was my fault. I should have realized he had reached the physical end of his track. A few I've trained were killed in combat, one in particular after having his front leg blown off with a round from an AK, died with his teeth sunk into the shooter. I've never seen a dog trained, with no compassion from the handler, to the point of his death. I even dislike hearing people "who heard from reliable sources" perpetuate those myths. Truthfully they sound like the types of stories PETA loves to spread around. Stories like that are best left alone unless someone has first-hand knowledge.


DFrost
DFrost


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Candy Eggert said:


> Hi Konnie,
> 
> Lynda's dog is heeling half way across her body in front. Being the klutz I am I'd be tripping over him. Besides being incorrect for Schutzhund heeling, he's obviously likely looking for his toy on her right side because that's where he's been rewarded :roll: What you accept you train. The dog's chest should be paralell with your left knee and not impede her movement.
> 
> That's one of the problems I see with this video. This could have been trained motivationally and correctly](*,) They are not mutually exclusive. IMO she will now have to go back and work HARDER to get this dog back in proper position and working there correctly.
> 
> If that was my dog I would go back to square one. Heeling isn't about movement, it's about correct position with the leg. Not even moving in a heeling pattern but strictly teaching the dog where correct position is before even adding movement. Correct position reward with a toy or food.


 
Well he was the first dog she started several years ago and we decided to pick our battles when she whipped him outta retirement to work him last year. There was never any ball on the right side, left side or any other side. We weren't taught to train and lure the dog with the toy. Its kept off the body or out of sight. She doesn't even keep anything on the front of her body. If you saw the later dogs she's trained, they don't have this issue. Regardless though, its irrlevant and has nothing to do with the discussion. You get the same result with any other method. For whatever position he was trained for, did the dog perform it here consistently. Is his attention consistent? His in motion work? Recall? And to think, the judge believed he was the best there and with a club with a national level podium TD. Actually, she really needed something for that cartilage free knee of hers. She was damn near crippled for the trial. I'm surprised she made it through it but that's that bulldog drive I guess.

Terrasita


----------



## maggie fraser

David Frost said:


> I know I'm not involved in sport, but I reckon I've been involved with about as high a drive dogs and most on this board. One of the reasons I started posting on a more "pet" related board was because of ignorant comments such as the one about dogs dying during training. That and a percieved attitude, of what's a dog among trainers. Comments were often made about the exclusive use of aversives and physical corrections. Folks had "heard" all the horror stories and of course readily believed them because it fit their way of thinking. I've trained high drive dogs for a number of years. I've had one die during drug training. He ate 10 grams of heroin and died before we got him to a vet. I had one die during a track. We were over a mile into a track, in Texas, in August. I was the handler, so yes it was my fault. I should have realized he had reached the physical end of his track. A few I've trained were killed in combat, one in particular after having his front leg blown off with a round from an AK, died with his teeth sunk into the shooter. I've never seen a dog trained, with no compassion from the handler, to the point of his death. I even dislike hearing people "who heard from reliable sources" perpetuate those myths. Truthfully they sound like the types of stories PETA loves to spread around. Stories like that are best left alone unless someone has first-hand knowledge.
> 
> 
> DFrost
> DFrost


It happens/happened like it or not. We had a big story over here years ago where a gsd was kicked and hanged so hard it resulted in his death in training by a police dept. no secret. I believe after the investigation into that one, the rules changed regarding training methods for all police forces in the UK.. Just sayin


----------



## Candy Eggert

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Well he was the first dog she started several years ago and we decided to pick our battles when she whipped him outta retirement to work him last year. There was never any ball on the right side, left side or any other side. We weren't taught to train and lure the dog with the toy. Its kept off the body or out of sight. She doesn't even keep anything on the front of her body. If you saw the later dogs she's trained, they don't have this issue. Regardless though, its irrlevant and has nothing to do with the discussion. You get the same result with any other method. For whatever position he was trained for, did the dog perform it here consistently. Is his attention consistent? His in motion work? Recall? And to think, the judge believed he was the best there and with a club with a national level podium TD. Actually, she really needed something for that cartilage free knee of hers. She was damn near crippled for the trial. I'm surprised she made it through it but that's that bulldog drive I guess.
> 
> Terrasita


 Okie dokie, then please tell me how marker training worked here?!? If marker training works and _*sticks*_ all that well then the dog should have been in "proper" position. If you are going to take a vehement stand on how YOUR method works on ALL dogs then I would expect you can prove it. This video did nothing to bolster her claims. I'm really not interested in hearing excuses today ;-)


----------



## Alice Bezemer

maggie fraser said:


> It happens/happened like it or not. We had a big story over here years ago where a gsd was kicked and hanged so hard it resulted in his death in training by a police dept. no secret. I believe after the investigation into that one, the rules changed regarding training methods for all police forces in the UK.. Just sayin


so it happened in the UK...

her question was : Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field?

and after she decided to basicly answer her own question she immediatly went over into innuendo and made velied comments and unsubstanciated accusations....if you are going to make a statement then first make sure its true and if you hear from a reliable source then check that source before bluntly posting....

if i had to give every "i heard from a relaible source" that ended up to be a BS story a penny id be broke in a bloody week !


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

So one jag off kicks a dog and all the little hens run to the coop for safety ?

What about the thousands and thousands of dogs NOT kicked to death ? I guess it is just that one dog that got kicked to death that should sway my thinking.

This is why I have a hard time listening to women sometimes. 4 million dogs got trained last year, and one dies and I am supposed to give a **** ?

Not to mention what a stupid ****ing arguement to try and use in a positive thread.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: Oh and she wasn't docile either.

THis is why I asked you what your experience was. What dumbass told you what a strong dog is ? You have dogs that herd. Not the same. Sorry, nice try.

THEN, who taught you that outing on a ball on a string is going to have **** all to do with biting a decoy ??

To this day, I ask my dog to out a tug or a sleeve and he has never in the 6 years I have had him since he learned what I wanted, not out. Not once, never. Get him fighting the decoy, and oh hey, your brilliant "just wait them out on the toy" bullshit goes out the window.

You can bla bla bla, all you want, but you do not belong in these threads, just like Maggie doesn't belong here. What you forget is some dumb **** who is shopping for opinions will decide to take YOURS. Yet you just don't have what it takes to have an opinion yet. You should still be asking questions, and keeping your mouth shut on shit like this.

Sometimes you people drive me shit house. You have no sense. If I have a question on herding, I will ask you. Don't go to three sessions with a posi club and tell me the bitch is strong. If she is strong, she is going to want that ball on a string, and **** you. It is not going to be one or two sessions. You gotta go and actually see some strong dogs before you can say that a dog is or isn't docile. The "appearence" of strength is not the same.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Joby I contacted Mike via e-mail about a year ago about acquiring a dog and never got a response.


ok so mike never responded..there are the others, and many others after that, don't compromise on the quality of materials used in the experiment, because one source did not respond..

again just cause you get a dog from Mike does not mean it will prove anything, to be fair you have to request that the dog be chosen for his traits that will go against your theory...to make the best test possible.

I just got home from Mike's place this morning, I saw several pups that would work well for you, and I also saw several pups that in my opinion would be damn nearly impossible to train to compete successfully with your methods as described (however vaguely), but I doubt highly they are for sale...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Konnie Hein said:


> I think there's a big difference between training with no corrections for Schutzhund, and trying to do the same for FR, especially when talking about a dog who gets lost in the fight.
> 
> I would like to know how a handler would go about training the out and recall off a decoy with no corrections, when the dog tends to get lost in the fight, and the decoy has the freedom to get the dog to that point (such as in the sport of FR). I have a dog like that, and I just can't see how it can be done, especially since this dog didn't have an out at all when I bought him at 10 months of age.
> 
> I added this picture to show the frame of mind of this dog when the decoy ramps him up...


The key here for me is the dog didnt have an out before you started working him up to this frame of mind. As I've said before with this type of frame of mind, you might be past a window of opportunity. My only experience for this is my husband's dog. Before the bite work training we had platz completely ingrained in his head. If he went to la la land, that could stop him. One night they are working him with the decoy at a distance and the bite work collar comes completly undone and down field he goes full tilt boogy. The decoy called me to tell me how cool it was that platz stopped him given he looked like he was coming with all he had. This decoy trained a KNPV line dog and a bouv at the time. This is the dog that has gone head on through glass and through chain link fences when he checked out into lala land. He felt nothing. With hubby's job, he couldn't keep up with training three nights a week. They wanted me to work him. I said no. I wasn't in the dog's head enough for me. My bitch is load and explode. Lynda and I have talked about this type of dog. I'll readily agree they are gone to lala land and you can't reach them. I tried the line and corrections once and she amped up into a snapping turtle. I put her up for awhile and started training with the marker training on some other things. Then I started it with stock that is a load explode prey trigger. Then I tested it on the trial field---high scoring. She has matured as they all do with more consciousness of me but the marker work got her past the resistance and conflict that I think adds to the lala land. Like what has been described, the prey, drive, load/explode escalated before she was two and any training I had done didn't touch her in that frame of mind. But I hadn't done any marker work at that point either. I don't have docile dogs. Even my corgis aren't docile. As I said before, I don't have any religious zeal either. Until I start a dog like the stronger ones I've had, I'll reserve. I do know that I'll start with the motivation and "in drive" work. Again, the nastiness and the position that it can't work from people who haven't tried it is what gets me in all this. Right now with Ms. Load and Explode I'm in the process of going around it with conditioning an alternative. We'll see how it works out. I remember spending a lot of time on this forum reading the mal stuff to try to come up with a plan on how to try to address this. A couple of herders have sat me down to tell me she has that HIT potential if I will only get out an e-collar a few times. We'll see how the next step works.

Terrasita


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: Oh and she wasn't docile either.
> 
> THis is why I asked you what your experience was. What dumbass told you what a strong dog is ? You have dogs that herd. Not the same. Sorry, nice try.
> 
> THEN, who taught you that outing on a ball on a string is going to have **** all to do with biting a decoy ??
> 
> To this day, I ask my dog to out a tug or a sleeve and he has never in the 6 years I have had him since he learned what I wanted, not out. Not once, never. Get him fighting the decoy, and oh hey, your brilliant "just wait them out on the toy" bullshit goes out the window.
> 
> You can bla bla bla, all you want, but you do not belong in these threads, just like Maggie doesn't belong here. What you forget is some dumb **** who is shopping for opinions will decide to take YOURS. Yet you just don't have what it takes to have an opinion yet. You should still be asking questions, and keeping your mouth shut on shit like this.
> 
> Sometimes you people drive me shit house. You have no sense. If I have a question on herding, I will ask you. Don't go to three sessions with a posi club and tell me the bitch is strong. If she is strong, she is going to want that ball on a string, and **** you. It is not going to be one or two sessions. You gotta go and actually see some strong dogs before you can say that a dog is or isn't docile. The "appearence" of strength is not the same.


 
You really do only see what you wanna see. Read further and you'll see they took it to the sleeve work. I do have a breed question though and one I wonder about. Are any of you naysayers training GSDs. Are they as in gaga land as mals?

Terrasita


----------



## maggie fraser

Alice Bezemer said:


> so it happened in the UK...
> 
> her question was : Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field?
> 
> and after she decided to basicly answer her own question she immediatly went over into innuendo and made velied comments and unsubstanciated accusations....if you are going to make a statement then first make sure its true and if you hear from a reliable source then check that source before bluntly posting....
> 
> if i had to give every "i heard from a relaible source" that ended up to be a BS story a penny id be broke in a bloody week !


I agree Alice, there's no argument there from me at this end.


----------



## Joby Becker

again///can it work YES. can it work with ANY dog, I think not..in ANY DOG in ANY venue, I SAY NO...

What other sports besides SCH have these HIGH level purely positive dogs competing, with the knowledge on this board, I imagine we would have heard of them by now....


----------



## maggie fraser

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> So one jag off kicks a dog and all the little hens run to the coop for safety ?
> 
> *What about the thousands and thousands of dogs NOT kicked to death ? I guess it is just that one dog that got kicked to death that should sway my thinking.*
> 
> This is why I have a hard time listening to women sometimes. 4 million dogs got trained last year, and one dies and I am supposed to give a **** ?
> 
> Not to mention what a stupid ****ing arguement to try and use in a positive thread.


It was his colleagues who dobbed him in and the training policy (all male) if I recall correctly...quite a few stories came out from that one. It was quite poingnant for the fact it changed how the tax payer took an interest in police dog training here, and effected changes on how things were to be done.

Anyway, I was just sayin, it wasn't an argument...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Candy Eggert said:


> Okie dokie, then please tell me how marker training worked here?!? If marker training works and _*sticks*_ all that well then the dog should have been in "proper" position. If you are going to take a vehement stand on how YOUR method works on ALL dogs then I would expect you can prove it. This video did nothing to bolster her claims. I'm really not interested in hearing excuses today ;-)


 
First of all, don't get confused between me and Lynda. I'm not purely positive. I have one dog here that I trained from the purely positive perspective to see how hit worked. Haven't competed with him yet in anything and he's not as hard a dog as my usual. So I don't believe he counts for me. However, I will say, certain things are ingrained in his head that I marker trained [platz] and I don't care WHAT he is doing, he will do it. My other dogs that I have trained with marker came to the table with a because I say so button. I don't think I can even be purely positvie with my type of dog. But can I TEACH a behavior with marker training? Yes. Nor, did I say any one method works with all dogs. I don't believe that either. Haven't trained all types of dogs and don't really want to. I have a load and explode. I wouldn't want another. Granted it has increased my training tool kit but its a PITA---mainly because I wasn't prepared for it. However, if you understood marker, somehow he was obviously reinforced in that position. The other thing is, it really isn't that bad as it was in the video. Lynda was damn near crippled and he was fighting to move and keep up with her. From the beginning, I liked Balabanov's follow the left leg. I don't think Rook was started this way and given his age and Lynda just wanted to put a title on him plus they have this mutual adoration thing going, we said screw it. We didn't have a lot of time and spent most of it putting 300+ paces on him in multiple locations. He's a generalist and he don't care if he sees reward opportunity or now. He knows it will come at some point and I'm convinced that can be the next day. 

At this point, I'm working through what I call my retrains with marker and working out how I want to start my next dog from the beginning with what I see with Ellis/Balabanov. Then we'll see. I don't buy the it can't be done so don't even try. We used to say the same thing in herding. Forget all that you've done in control work, once they see the stock its out the window. The trouble is they didn't do it in drive. It was all static stuff. The difference between you the others, and me and Lynda is that we are willing to TRY it and devote some time and thought to it from the beginning to at least see if it has some value. The trouble is its a naught experiement because everyone will say its not a strong dog. Then we get into what's strong? Handler hard to the point of aggressive which I won't put up with. Lala land. I don't do mals--at least not the ones I've seen around here. This might narrow the field a bit. I wish JO were closer though. I'd like to see Esko in person. Might have to finagle a work trip to San Antonio.


Terrasita


Terrasita


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie;216139I don't think I can even be purely positvie with my type of dog.
Terrasita[/QUOTE said:


> You CAN"T??? or WON'T..I ask because you are the loan supporter of Lynda's statements (or so it APPEARS), unless I have read wrong...
> 
> Bob has done a great job explaining his experiences and theories, but even he has admitted that most likely (or something like that) it's not gonna work with certain dogs....even if it is 1 tiny freaking % (1%) that leaves A LOT of dogs that it is NOT gonna work for.
> 
> So the whole ANY dog regardless of whatever..is NOT valid in your opinion?
> 
> I may be shit all for trainer but I am good at finding 1%'er type dogs....


----------



## maggie fraser

Joby, wtf is wrong with you...I thought you said you were out of this thread about 10 pages ago...

No-one..No-one.. could train 100% of the dog population on one set method, I didn't even need uncle Jeff to tell me that. what the hell is your point...or are you just enjoying the security of the bandwagon. Fkn grow up!


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> You really do only see what you wanna see. Read further and you'll see they took it to the sleeve work. I do have a breed question though and one I wonder about. Are any of you naysayers training GSDs. Are they as in gaga land as mals?
> 
> Terrasita



Nope no GSD's here....not my kind of dog to work with...im going to get a SHITLOAD of comments on this but what the hell...the are not as good in my eyes as a Xmali or Xdutchie.....some will agree with me and some not but they simply do not have the same temprament


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> You CAN"T??? or WON'T..I ask because you are the loan supporter of Lynda's statements (or so it APPEARS), unless I have read wrong...
> 
> Bob has done a great job explaining his experiences and theories, but even he has admitted that most likely (or something like that) it's not gonna work with certain dogs....even if it is 1 tiny freaking % (1%) that leaves A LOT of dogs that it is NOT gonna work for.
> 
> So the whole ANY dog regardless of whatever..is NOT valid in your opinion?
> 
> I may be shit all for trainer but I am good at finding 1%'er type dogs....


----------



## Joby Becker

quoted but no answer


----------



## maggie fraser

Joby Becker said:


> quoted but no answer


I think the answer was in the quote numpty :smile:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I want to know why, with everyone that is disagreeing with Lynda, I am the only one that get labeled like a cur coming in for a bite. LOL I think it because she knows that motivation only works if your standing there with rewards and doesn't want it brought up.

Someone else even brought up how positive motivation was all the rage in obedience circles about ten years ago but has since died out. Why? Because the dog broke too often during the routines when they got no reward. They don't work because they are trained, they work for goodies. How do the possy dogs title? Through sheer retitition....eventually they get through the couse. I know of one that took 13 times. To hear the trainer, you would think the dog was as solid as any and she never mentioned that it took 13 times.


----------



## Joby Becker

maggie fraser said:


> I think the answer was in the quote numpty :smile:


so it was a copy...i would guess that is an agreement then


----------



## maggie fraser

Don Turnipseed said:


> I want to know why, with everyone that is disagreeing with Lynda, I am the only one that get labeled like a cur coming in for a bite. LOL I think it because she knows that motivation only works if your standing there with rewards and doesn't want it brought up.
> 
> Someone else even brought up how positive motivation was all the rage in obedience circles about ten years ago but has since died out. Why? Because the dog broke too often during the routines when they got no reward. They don't work because they are trained, they work for goodies. How do the possy dogs title? Through sheer retitition....eventually they get through the couse. I know of one that took 13 times. To hear the trainer, you would think the dog was as solid as any and she never mentioned that it took 13 times.


Don, what the hell are you doing posting on this thread, you don't belong here, as does neither Terrasita, myself and quite a few others according to the hot air balloon who likes to fart in and out now and again? :grin:


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> You CAN"T??? or WON'T..I ask because you are the loan supporter of Lynda's statements (or so it APPEARS), unless I have read wrong...
> 
> Bob has done a great job explaining his experiences and theories, but even he has admitted that most likely (or something like that) it's not gonna work with certain dogs....even if it is 1 tiny freaking % (1%) that leaves A LOT of dogs that it is NOT gonna work for.
> 
> So the whole ANY dog regardless of whatever..is NOT valid in your opinion?
> 
> I may be shit all for trainer but I am good at finding 1%'er type dogs....


Yep, you read wrong. I don't lay claim to 100% of anything in life. I would start it and work it through first before I said it didn't work though. With my most hard headed dog, I've seen the benefit of it and its helped me with the load and explode---so much that I will START the next dog with it. There are some definition issues. For me purely positive is my dog Khaiba. He doesn't have a because I say so button. Its all purely positive training and I'm in his head. He's got a LOT of drive but he is not hard. So he is exempt from this discussion. I will tell a dog "no." I've had dogs that through the course of their life I never laid a hand on them and some I have. We get it over quick and I don't plan to revisit. There are things I have zero tolerance for and high on the list is bite the hand that feeds you and you better not lose your head and put my little life at stake with livestock either. Look at my kid wrong and you might be six feet under. AGAIN, my next dog will be the experiment for some of the type of things you raise---call offs, outs, etc. I work call offs on stock and I would really like to pick Gary's brain on Xena since that's the best I've seen and the best relationship I've seen besides Lynda and Rook. My road to being a cookie trainer actually started with a client dog that I had 30 days to train for a title. I had tested her and really could get it done with instinct but I needed the obedience part. She had an obedience title so she had some concept of what I needed. Two weeks into it I was getting refusal and hard stares. Then I thought crap---her owner works with cookies. I called her and asked her did she feed them for EVERYTHING? She said they expect to get it at some time. So I went out and bought some cookies. Her response was about time you got it. She never would down for me [submission] so I worked her with the standing stop. The bitch I have is a grandaughter and who I refer to as the union employee. There's another in Alaska. Same thing. I think its genetic. I've put her through all her paces and I'm trialing in a couple of weeks. My attitude around the house is "you don't get to choose." She trialed really well on positive intermittent reinforcement and I spent many hours gearing up for that to test it. So it did work. However, sometimes especially with chores, I don't have time for that. So I adopted the negative punishment---game over. You're not going to get anything trialworthy out of this dog with corrections. Also, its not all on her on the trial field. I do have a part in it. If my timing sucks---we're toast. Since I started this she hasn't gone to free agent mode on the trial field so I'm on the right track. Remember, I was old school--no cookies. I was never Kohler really and my mother said as a kid I got into the dog's head. The marker allows me to do that even on a deeper level. Most people will say I don't give a damn about competition for the sake of competition or peer pressure either for that matter. I do like to see the training reproduce on the trial field and even with me as an imposter at the post. These are the things I'm working through with these two dogs who aren't even my ideal mental packages. Bob's dog is. But then again, the GSD is the be all and end all for me. Bob will say don't sell that bouv bitch short. He's right she is fascinating. Its just the load/explode thing that doesn't quite mesh with my personality. The reason I don't have a GSD now and live vicariously through Thunder is to see it through as far as I can with this dog.

Terrasita


----------



## tracey schneider

Great point and well stated, no. Need to hand over the ammunition.

T




David Frost said:


> I know I'm not involved in sport, but I reckon I've been involved with about as high a drive dogs and most on this board. One of the reasons I started posting on a more "pet" related board was because of ignorant comments such as the one about dogs dying during training. That and a percieved attitude, of what's a dog among trainers. Comments were often made about the exclusive use of aversives and physical corrections. Folks had "heard" all the horror stories and of course readily believed them because it fit their way of thinking. I've trained high drive dogs for a number of years. I've had one die during drug training. He ate 10 grams of heroin and died before we got him to a vet. I had one die during a track. We were over a mile into a track, in Texas, in August. I was the handler, so yes it was my fault. I should have realized he had reached the physical end of his track. A few I've trained were killed in combat, one in particular after having his front leg blown off with a round from an AK, died with his teeth sunk into the shooter. I've never seen a dog trained, with no compassion from the handler, to the point of his death. I even dislike hearing people "who heard from reliable sources" perpetuate those myths. Truthfully they sound like the types of stories PETA loves to spread around. Stories like that are best left alone unless someone has first-hand knowledge.
> 
> 
> DFrost
> DFrost


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Don, only you can be the cur ! ! ! ! I would love to see a great all positive training method, but with this silly shit going on, it is not going to happen. Even if it did, it is going to be way above anyone on this forums ability to do it correctly.

It just cracks me up when the knot heads come on here just to run off at the mouth. I have yet to see any of them post different methods for anything.

It is typical chick shit. BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA. No substance, just how dare you, and why can I not control this thing ? LOL


----------



## maggie fraser

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Don, only you can be the cur ! ! ! ! I would love to see a great all positive training method, but with this silly shit going on, it is not going to happen. Even if it did, it is going to be way above anyone on this forums ability to do it correctly.
> 
> It just cracks me up when the knot heads come on here just to run off at the mouth. I have yet to see any of them post different methods for anything.
> 
> It is typical *small dick* shit. BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA. No substance, just how dare you, and why can I not control this thing ? LOL


 
sorted!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I guess that is supposed to be an awesome response ??

Oooooooo BURN. 

Who ever told you you were good at this was probably just trying to get laid, or is too pussy to tell you the truth. LOL


----------



## maggie fraser

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I guess that is supposed to be an awesome response ??
> 
> Oooooooo BURN.
> 
> Who ever told you you were good at this was probably just trying to get laid, or is too pussy to tell you the truth. LOL


 
Every bit as awesome as many of your responses on this thread. Besides, no-one has ever told me I was good at this...and they certainly don't need to tell me I'm good at anything to get laid. How 'bout you Jeff?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

maggie fraser said:


> Every bit as awesome as many of your responses on this thread. Besides, no-one has ever told me I was good at this...and they certainly don't need to tell me I'm good at anything to get laid. How 'bout you Jeff?


 
Really. They ought to be marketing their own skills. Too funny. Okay, back on topic or is this really what it comes down to and I'm missing something.

Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I don't like fat chicks. Sorry. Although, I do have a small side business making soap.


----------



## maggie fraser

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I don't like fat chicks. Sorry. Although, I do have a small side business making soap.


Who's the fat in reference to ? I'm not fat...don't have a beer belly or middle age spread neither, how 'bout you jeff? and soap too ? That have anything to do with boxes ?

Terrasita, just a little play time.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Jeff, LOL. That photo next to Maggie is that now famous singer from Scotland who blew away the judges on that talent show that runs here every week.:-\"


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Lynda Myers said:


> Kadi There have been concrete examples and a couple others post a schutzhund club that trains using this method. A whole club!!!!http://www.rwdc.org/index.htm
> Kadi go check it out for yourself see it with your our eyes.


I already did. It's a whole club, but I only see 3 SchIII's, 1 which is Bob's dog, and 1 SchII, which I believe I already mentioned. The rest of the dogs are either untitled, have TT's (which specifically includes no obedience, you can't give the dog any commands), and some BH's and CGC's. 

It's proof of some limited success, but it's not proof of resounding success with these methods. 



> Why does no one wants to accept that as fact. Once again the original question was can a dog be trained using only motivational training and the answer is yes.
> Several have come on here and said as much but that's not good enough for some on here.


And I believe I said in one of my own posts that I believe dogs can be trained with these methods, but I questioned to what level. I also firmly believe it's one thing to train obedience with these methods (I actually have, although it was about 10 years ago) and another to train bitework where the dog has more chance to self reward.



> Most people don't want to go to the nationals or world it take time and money to travel like that. You and I both it's hard to get some folks out to train on a regular. Not to mention everyone doesn't measures success in the same manner.


And that's fine. But when people are saying that any dog can be trained to any level using these methods, the request for proof is going to include asking about what dogs are at the highest level. Otherwise the only thing that can be proved about these methods is that some dogs can be trained to some level of competence. The rest of the claims are unproven theories.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I saw something on you tube with that girl. Maggie appears to have no talent, so she is BLA BLA BLA with that pic as well.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Lynda said she had one dog compete at 2 and one at 2 1/2 for a BH. I thought a Bh was obedience work. Innmy mind, bite work involves a bit more than the obedience end.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: Mr Internet Mondio Ring Expert is critisizing a Sch Dobermann dabbling in MR for a 36/100 score
> 
> Jago was not a Sch dog. You were training regularly with us. We told you how many times not to trial ? You knew better. Just like when Mike Ellis chewed your ass. You had just been to one of his seminars, and still you knew better. You ran off to Sch after that like a little girl.


OK Jeff let's tell the complete story.
This trial was FIVE years ago when Jago wasn't even two years old. Maybe Jago wasn't ready but I took a chance to support the club with an entry (also entered Dubheasa for a MR I)
Who's this "we" shit? You had never even trialed a MR dog and you were giving advise? LMAO. While I was on the field YOU were on the sidelines talking trash. You think no one told me about you running your mouth, because I'd never mentioned it to you? You can repeat the Mike Ellis nonsense all you want.
Mike Ellis never chewed my ass or anyone else, more of your transference. I didn't "run off to Schutzhund" I was training both at the same time and decided to concentrate on Schutzhund. Mainly cause I got tired of driving up to Denver or
Larkspur and having you show up 2-3 hours late if at all and listen to your pissing and moaning if you did show up.
What was even more frustrating is training at Charlies with Keith and Kevin J who was a better decoy and trainer and more of an Adult at 16 then you'll ever be ! 
Maybe if you weren't so concerned with shit that happened FIVE years ago and spent more time training your dog. You'd actually pass your next trial or at least teach your dog to find the decoy standing in the blind INSIDE in less then three minutes. Or maybe you should pray they don't use one of those slippery
palisades !


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Doug Zaga said:


> :neutral:


Doug, 

Don't believe (and comment on) everything you read on this list ;-)


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

You ran off to Sch right after that. There was no shit talking, I said it right to your face. Your dogs were completely out of control.

You got 16 points, and the judge was kind to you.

I know you remember the ass chewing you got, it lasted about ten minutes. He told you if you didn't want help, and just wanted to do things your own way, then why pay the fee ??

Lets see, three hours late ?? I doubt that. I wouldn't even bother to show up at that point, and didn't.

I worked till 5 am, and just didn't feel like showing up. After all, what was in it for me ? No one there to work my dogs. And an hour drive as well. LOL I remember how quickly all the other decoys bailed as well. No one wanted to deal with that clubs shit. 

You were back doing Sch by then. Maybe there was a pattern.

Tell us about the time you wanted a trophy, but your dog failed the three, and had a fit. I heard you were chasing old women around screaming at them over a trophy.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> You ran off to Sch right after that. There was no shit talking, I said it right to your face. Your dogs were completely out of control.
> 
> >I was out on the field, you were running your mouth in the trial
> >secretary's tent. Nothing to my face
> 
> You got 16 points, and the judge was kind to you.
> 
> >36 not 16 but then honesty and accuracy were never your
> >strong points
> 
> I know you remember the ass chewing you got, it lasted about ten minutes. He told you if you didn't want help, and just wanted to do things your own way, then why pay the fee ??
> 
> >Nope, didn't happen that way. Besides it was over five years
> >ago. It was my money and none of your business. So what's
> >your point?
> 
> Lets see, three hours late ?? I doubt that. I wouldn't even bother to show up at that point, and didn't.
> 
> >You also couldn't be bothered to call anyone and say "I had
> >a hard night and I can't make it" you just left people hanging
> 
> 
> I worked till 5 am, and just didn't feel like showing up. After all, what was in it for me ? No one there to work my dogs. And an hour drive as well. LOL I remember how quickly all the other decoys bailed as well. No one wanted to deal with that clubs shit.
> 
> >Horse crap. I brought my own decoy to work both of our dogs
> >and you ran him off.
> 
> You were back doing Sch by then. Maybe there was a pattern.
> 
> >I wasn't "back doing Sch" I never stopped doing Schutzhund
> 
> Tell us about the time you wanted a trophy, but your dog failed the three, and had a fit. I heard you were chasing old women around screaming at them over a trophy.
> 
> >It wasn't a three
> >The dog didn't fail, She passed and the trophy was promised
> >before the trial and then they changed the rules in the middle
> >of the trial. There were NO chasing old women. I threw the
> >ribbons in the lap of the MAN running things and told him to
> >stick them where the sun don't shine. He jumped up like he
> >was going to do something and the old women held him back.
> >Why don't you find out WTF you're talking about before you
> >keep running your mouth.
> 
> >It all worked out in the end. I've got a decoy ten minutes from
> >my house that actually shows up when he says he is going to
> >and notifies everyone when he can't make it. You're the self
> >appointment WDF expert on Everything and the Premier
> >Seminar Giver of South Dakota.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Don Turnipseed said:


> Lynda said she had one dog compete at 2 and one at 2 1/2 for a BH. I thought a Bh was obedience work. Innmy mind, bite work involves a bit more than the obedience end.


Dust off the spectacles Don I didn't write competed at but ready at in.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: >I was out on the field, you were running your mouth in the trial
>secretary's tent. Nothing to my face.

Whatever Thomas, we told you for weeks your dogs were not ready. Nothig like embarrassing your club. Tell them about when you punched the blind. LOL

Quote: >36 not 16 but then honesty and accuracy were never your 
>strong points

You were "given" 36, but the reality was 16 points. Honesty is my strong point. 

Quote: >Nope, didn't happen that way. Besides it was over five years 
>ago. It was my money and none of your business. So what's 
>your point?

My point is you are the only person on the planet to get his ass chewed by Mike Ellis.

Quote: >You also couldn't be bothered to call anyone and say "I had
>a hard night and I can't make it" you just left people hanging

I called the first couple of years, but since no one decided to actually tell the club what was going on, I gave up on it. Again, the only decoy, and I couldn't tell you how many guys they ran off with their bullshit. Nothing in it for me.

Quote: He jumped up like he
>was going to do something and the old women held him back.
>Why don't you find out WTF you're talking about before you 
>keep running your mouth.

What were you going to do about it ? You are wider than you are tall, you would of had a heart attack. I like the version I heard much better.

Your dog failed the track, but you wanted a trophy. So you had a fit like a two year old.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> *The dog is what decides the training method, and not the trainer*. The examples I have given are good training methods for sure, and while the one dog has success with positive, the other dog is not going to be successful with positive only.


=D>


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> We have gotten away from the original question which is can a dog be trained using motivational training only and the answer...YES!


I'd agree that a dog can be titled using 'motivational' training only (no physical corrections).

That is not the same as saying that every dog can be trained for every field in this way.

I'd also question why it is so desirable. Dogs find extinction and withholding of rewards aversive, so I wonder why someone would assume that a longer period of these aversives is better than a shorter period of physical aversives.




> All the other replies reflect peoples personally feelings, preferences, and own life experiences.


As of course do yours.




> Please remember training a dog this way in dog sports is fairly young and as such it's the free thinkers that will first embrace it.


I know people who have been marker/clicker training for dogsports for more than 15 years - is that young? Outside of dogsports it's been around a long time.

Are adopters of modern e-collars also free thinkers?




> Because it's hard for human nature to break from tradition.





> It amazes me that so many believe there aren't people out that can in deed carry it out successfully. Why is that? Is it just because you personally haven't done it or those your acquainted with it haven't? I never realized until right now just how closed minded most of you are.


Critical thinking and questioning of a theory based on limited evidence does not necessarily indicate a closed mind.




> Need I remind you that had that same closed minded thinking stopped people like Christopher Columbus, Wright Brothers, Thomas Edison etc. by listening to the nay sayers instead of following their own mind our world as we know it would be vastly different.


Need I remind you of all the new and exciting developments in this world that turned out not to match all the claims they promised?




> Again the question was can it be done? Not how many people are doing, will you use it, or why won't it work? It was CAN IT BE DONE and the answer it YES!!!!!! Like it or not the answer is still YES!!!!





> Ok I get it most won't train this way good, great, fine by me. So please stop coming here spewing all your negative BS.




Hmm. I don't remember this being your private board where you get to decide that only certain opinions are allowed.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Is it true that occasionally dogs in your discipline really die (killed) on the training field? I ask because that's what I was told by good source. So was curious to know if it's true. *If it is wow that speaks volumes of the intelligence of those doing the training over there and we all otto follow suit huh*? It would confirm for me what I have always wondered about...that their breeding dogs so high up in drive and hardness just to have a dog left after the training is completed. I mean what's a couple dead dogs among club members right?
> Yet let's all get on that band wagon shall we! ;-)


#-o

Way to go and insult an entire nation's dog trainers.

I've seen a dog die on a training field here in the UK. A ball got stuck in her throat and it could not be dislodged.

I guess that speaks volumes of the intelligence of those doing training in the UK?

#-o#-o#-o


----------



## Ian Forbes

Kat LaPlante said:


> you guys are going to get this thread locked, you're bullying Lynda.....wow that sounded like I am 10. seriously dont pick on her on this thread, it would suck if it got locked because of something that silly. I have come to some conlusions after sorting through all these posts.
> 
> 1. Jeff O and I need to learn how to quote individual sentences, I just quote the whole post but you retype the stuff.
> 
> 2. Compulsion itself is simply too broad to EVER be eliminated.
> 3. the elimination of compulsion results in dogs not meeting their full potention in an expedited time frame, if ever.
> 4. More postive motivation should be incorporated into all our training


I diagree with your first paragraph, but i agree with your 4 points.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> *Maybe instead of trying to reward with something external, you use what the dog wants as the reward? Just a thought. That's part of the doing it right. Be sure you use as the reward, what the dog sees as reward and not what the handler thinks ought to be the reward.*


I agree.

You also need to use what the dog finds punishing (reinforcement does not exist in a vacuum), not what the handler thinks the dog ought to find punishing. It works both ways.....


----------



## Ian Forbes

maggie fraser said:


> It happens/happened like it or not. We had a big story over here years ago where a gsd was kicked and hanged so hard it resulted in his death in training by a police dept. no secret. I believe after the investigation into that one, the rules changed regarding training methods for all police forces in the UK.. Just sayin


Abuse is abuse - it's not a method.

Bizarrely, after that case, e-collars and pinch collars were banned from use by UK police forces. How that stops a dog from being abuse is anyone's guess....


----------



## Ian Forbes

maggie fraser said:


> Joby, wtf is wrong with you...I thought you said you were out of this thread about 10 pages ago...
> 
> No-one..No-one.. could train 100% of the dog population on one set method, I didn't even need uncle Jeff to tell me that. what the hell is your point...or are you just enjoying the security of the bandwagon. Fkn grow up!


Err, Joby's point is that Lynda made the claim that any dog could be trained using her method.

I guess you missed that?


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Ian Forbes said:


> Err, Joby's point is that Lynda made the claim that any dog could be trained using her method.
> 
> I guess you missed that?



Lynda's been awefull quiet the last few pages even tho she was there so im wondering if selective reading on her part has struck again ?


----------



## maggie fraser

Ian Forbes said:


> Abuse is abuse - it's not a method.


Was the abuse the method in this case, or was it abusive method ? I recall in one report that the particular incident happened due to the dog expressing handler aggression and that three other incidences of three other dogs being handler aggressive, all four dogs (different handlers), were all on the same course at the same time.

Where did you draw the distinction between abuse and method?


----------



## Ian Forbes

maggie fraser said:


> Was the abuse the method in this case, or was it abusive method ? I recall in one report that the particular incident happened due to the dog expressing handler aggression and that three other incidences of three other dogs being handler aggressive, all four dogs (different handlers), were all on the same course at the same time.
> 
> Where did you draw the distinction between abuse and method?


You said that rules changed regarding training methods after the investigation into the Essex police dogs abuse.

Can you tell me what methods changed? I know that training programs and inspection became more transparent and that the use of pinch collars and e-collars (work that one out) was banned by UK police forces.

Stringing up and kicking dogs was never an accepted 'method' regardless of how many people practiced it. It was abuse and 3 people were convicted of the charges.


----------



## maggie fraser

Ian Forbes said:


> You said that rules changed regarding training methods after the investigation into the Essex police dogs abuse.
> 
> Can you tell me what methods changed? I know that training programs and inspection became more transparent and that the use of pinch collars and e-collars (work that one out) was banned by UK police forces.
> 
> Stringing up and kicking dogs was never an accepted 'method' regardless of how many people practiced it. It was abuse and 3 people were convicted of the charges.


I had omitted in my post the following ban on ecollar and prongs so as not to fuel the fire and my post being misconstrued on here. What you have stated as abuse, when carried out and systematically applied suggested to me an abusive method. My rules remark was a general one regarding the transparency factor you mention, I was curious as to how you drew the distinction, thanks for the reply.


----------



## Joby Becker

Hey Mags,
How is it going today?

Kat, I agree with your synopsis about the 4 points...I do not agree that anyone is picking on lynda, me included. I think that she made it clear that anything, with any dog can be trained without corrections, I personally doubt she has ever owned a dog that is similar to some of the dogs owned by people on here, who are disputing her claims. 

Several people that are involved in sports have presented specific examples of what they feel cannot be trained without corrections, and have asked for the non-corrective methods to use, and they have not been provided. 

Several people have asked about no correction training in other biting sports, besides SCH that have had great success, none have been provided.

We are not the ones that said ANY dog, no matter how drivey, tough, whatever...she did...

Lynda also stated "It would confirm for me what I have always wondered about...that their breeding dogs so high up in drive and hardness just to have a dog left after the training is completed" This to me seems like has no intentions of getting one of these drivey tough type dogs, and seems to almost be against breeding such dogs.

The truth is lynda, these dogs are not bred to be able "survive" the training methods, they are bred to do a job effectively...

The truth is the training methods are devised to be able to control such animals...


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Wow, I get the feeling that Lynda must have said any dog could be trained with motivational. Am I reading you right Joby?


----------



## Joby Becker

Don Turnipseed said:


> Wow, I get the feeling that Lynda must have said any dog could be trained with motivational. Am I reading you right Joby?


"and contrary to what others will tell you or believe* it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness*." 

This is the quote. This was posted in regards to training without any kind of correction.

It is the reason I jumped into this topic. I think it is a pretty naive statement, but one she has defended very vehemently. 

I'm betting that some would believe you could train all your dogs to ignore game in front of them without ever having to correct them as well...how do you think that would pan out?


----------



## Sarah ten Bensel

This is strange thread, but interesting. I am not familiar with Koehler, except for what I have read. Is there a distinction on what phase (learning a behvior versus proofing a known behavior) a dog is in when corrections are used? Is Koehler using corrections/pressure, compulsion for the LEARNING of a behavior? I do correct my dogs along the whole spectrum of witholding reward to use of compulsion, however in learning phase it doesn't make sense to me to use physical corrections or force, especially if a dog doesn't know how to "turn the pressure off." Where it gets "gray" for me in this discussion, is use of tension on a pinch to GUIDE a dog - to help them make the correct decision. Would motivational purists consider this punitive? I don't because the pressure is adjusted to what a dog can handle without giving me stress behviors like avoidance, etc. Again, it is my hope that I am successfully teaching my dog how to relieve the pressure. Its my opnion that if a dog doesn't know how to do this through poor training it borders on abuse. 
Understand that I am not on the podium, so to speak, and I have schH 1 on my dog, nothing else and my background from my dog years ago was 100% motivational (read- no physical correction). That did not work (she was just a pet), but I didn't know otherwise. I am not skilled enough in training to do Koelher exclusively or 100% motivationally exclusively. Hats off to those who can do these methods with SUCCESS.
I have learned a lot from 100% motivational trainers - the importance of breaking down each skill to its smallest components during the learning phase. Secondly, the concepts on how dogs learn and think.

My puppy Pele (well, 10 months) is teaching me even more. Totally different dog than me previous two. I still am scratching my head on how to get into his head and find out the best way for him to learn and for me to train.
Speaking of training, I need to get off the computer and get out and train my dogs


----------



## Doug Zaga

I was introduced to postitive rewards based training with my recent Rottweiler having attended an Ellis seminar and my trainer being a student of the system.

I will say this...my Rotti does great on positive rewards based training but I am NO fool to think I could get him trial ready without aversives/compulsion. Just Saturday the stubborn muthf*ker didn't listen, he got pissed, I corrected him, he got pissed more at me, he got another correction, he tagged my right forearm good, I grabbed him by the throat and.... Anyways, after he got his color back we moved on.

Just Sayn!


----------



## Joby Becker

Sarah ten Bensel said:


> This is strange thread, but interesting. I am not familiar with Koehler, except for what I have read.  Is there a distinction on what phase (learning a behvior versus proofing a known behavior) a dog is in when corrections are used? Is Koehler using corrections/pressure, compulsion for the LEARNING of a behavior? I do correct my dogs along the whole spectrum of witholding reward to use of compulsion, however in learning phase it doesn't make sense to me to use physical corrections or force, especially if a dog doesn't know how to "turn the pressure off." Where it gets "gray" for me in this discussion, is use of tension on a pinch to GUIDE a dog - to help them make the correct decision. Would motivational purists consider this punitive? I don't because the pressure is adjusted to what a dog can handle without giving me stress behviors like avoidance, etc. Again, it is my hope that I am successfully teaching my dog how to relieve the pressure. Its my opnion that if a dog doesn't know how to do this through poor training it borders on abuse.
> Understand that I am not on the podium, so to speak, and I have schH 1 on my dog, nothing else and my background from my dog years ago was 100% motivational (read- no physical correction). That did not work (she was just a pet), but I didn't know otherwise.
> I have learned a lot from 100% motivational trainers - the importance of breaking down each skill to its smallest components during the learning phase. Secondly, the concepts on how dogs learn and think.


Koehler from what I have read has a unique view on what is motivational...His training techniques are motivational, just not 100% positive. He also breaks the skills down to small components, and advocates PROOFING each step, to work towards 100% COMPLIANCE.

I see a huge benefit personally in training positive motivation. But also see the huge benefit of corrections.


----------



## russ roberts

No need to apologise to Mr. Koehler. He was aware of the people who criticised his methods and was not deterred. I imagine he felt fairly secure about what he had accomplished versus his detractors. Things really aren"t that different now, if you read on this thread who is doing what and what methods they use.


----------



## tracey schneider

to quote easily....

copy and paste text into your reply. Highlight text you want to quote and then click the button above (4th from the right) that looks like the "speak box" in a comic strip. Done.:grin:

I am curious, why would anyone WANT to train 100% motivationally? Looking at Lynda, she uses compulsion at home for manners... so there is a chance the dog carries these corrections over any way, esp if somewhat soft. Terrisita says she isnt opposed to using it if need be (correct me if Im wrong) same for Bob, we all agree it takes much longer...... so I cant help but shake my head, why would I spend all that time when i can make it black and white in one session? Please explain.........

t


----------



## Doug Zaga

> to quote easily....
> 
> copy and paste text into your reply. Highlight text you want to quote and then click the button above (4th from the right) that looks like the "speak box" in a comic strip. Done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am curious, why would anyone WANT to train 100% motivationally? Looking at Lynda, she uses compulsion at home for manners... so there is a chance the dog carries these corrections over any way, esp if somewhat soft. Terrisita says she isnt opposed to using it if need be (correct me if Im wrong) same for Bob, we all agree it takes much longer...... so I cant help but shake my head, why would I spend all that time when i can make it black and white in one session? Please explain.........


Just trying it out... :-#


----------



## maggie fraser

> to quote easily....
> 
> copy and paste text into your reply. Highlight text you want to quote and then click the button above (4th from the right) that looks like the "speak box" in a comic strip. Done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am curious, why would anyone WANT to train 100% motivationally? Looking at Lynda, she uses compulsion at home for manners... so there is a chance the dog carries these corrections over any way, esp if somewhat soft. Terrisita says she isnt opposed to using it if need be (correct me if Im wrong) same for Bob, we all agree it takes much longer...... so I cant help but shake my head, why would I spend all that time when i can make it black and white in one session? Please explain.........


:-D

t


----------



## Bob Scott

tracey delin said:


> to quote easily....
> 
> copy and paste text into your reply. Highlight text you want to quote and then click the button above (4th from the right) that looks like the "speak box" in a comic strip. Done.:grin:
> 
> I am curious, why would anyone WANT to train 100% motivationally? Looking at Lynda, she uses compulsion at home for manners... so there is a chance the dog carries these corrections over any way, esp if somewhat soft. Terrisita says she isnt opposed to using it if need be (correct me if Im wrong) same for Bob, we all agree it takes much longer...... so I cant help but shake my head, why would I spend all that time when i can make it black and white in one session? Please explain.........
> 
> t


With 50 plus yrs of playing with dogs, using dern near every method out there, my goal was to see how far I could take it with no correction. Plain and simple! With help, I learned the ins and outs of it and I was successful! It also taught me a lot of patience and self control. I still need more of both. ;-)
I wont say I will or wont use it 100% with another dog. I'd have to wait for the particular situation to make that decision but it will forever be a HUGE part of my training. 
Other then that, I pretty much gave my thoughts on it and this "disscussion" has become nothing more then "I know you are but what am I". 
I think most good discussions break down into nothing more then trying to convince someone how wrong they are. 
I do believe I have the right dog. I do believe he has a the correct GSD temperment aka Captain Max.
He's not the hard ass, stubborn headed, nobody come near me, handler aggressive beast some think is correct and he's not the pushover wuss some think is needed for this sort of training. I have no need for either of those types although some do.I've seen both types correctly worked with no corrections. He's not an extreme dog from either end of the spectrum. Some would call that moderate. I call it correct for a GSD! 
He can play fetch with my grandkids and he does what I require of him in watching over my family, my property and my car.


----------



## Lynda Myers

> Lynda's been awefull quiet the last few pages even tho she was there so im wondering if selective reading on her part has struck again ?


Not selective at all but why beat a dead horse? I've stated my position and most disagree. What's left to say after 36 pages and 356 replies? 
Success or failure of method is depended on several things like a handler's understanding, skill level and probably most important their desire or willingness to using the method. All of these has a bearing on the ending result and success.

Tracey brought up that even Terrasita will use compulsion if need be. But what's not known is that she will exhaust all avenues before reaching for compulsion. Spending hours looking at the problem from all angles and tweaking her training according. Because of this 99.9% of the time a physical correction is not necessary. However please understand that Terrasita is all about fair and right as well as the being Queen of Patience. 
 


> Several people that are involved in sports have presented specific examples of what they feel can not be trained without corrections. And have asked for the non-corrective methods to use and they have not been provided.


They weren't provided because you didn't answer the question as to what foundation was laid for it. Because of that I didn't feel compelled to explain something that you weren't properly prepared for.



> to quote easily....
> 
> copy and paste text into your reply. Highlight text you want to quote and then click the button above (4th from the right) that looks like the "speak box" in a comic strip. Done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am curious, why would anyone WANT to train 100% motivationally? Looking at Lynda, she uses compulsion at home for manners... so there is a chance the dog carries these corrections over any way, esp if somewhat soft. Terrisita says she isnt opposed to using it if need be (correct me if Im wrong) same for Bob, we all agree it takes much longer...... so I cant help but shake my head, why would I spend all that time when i can make it black and white in one session? Please explain.........
> 
> t


Because it enhances the relation with your dog as well as your handling skills and helps you to know your dog better. Because you are actually seeing how his mind works and most important how he learns. 
Example: 
One day while training with the prior schutzhund club one of the member's was running through her down in motion exercise and the dog wasn't doing it. In the past this behavior was never an issue. Some would say oh he's just being willful and stubborn. But that wasn't the case dogs read our whole bodies and when we train behaviors we unknowingly position our bodies a certain way. So much so that it becomes part of the command. This is what happened with the above scenario. When the command to down was given the body language did not signal a down to the dog it said to heel. Several of the members looking on picked up on it. Once this was brought to light and the handler change the position the dog preformed the behavior beautifully. Maybe the handler will commend further on this as they do frequent this board.


This training teaches a dog how to think. When done the way I was taught to do it will give you a mental line into the dog's head. So that in those times that the dog may be triggered into gaga land you have a way in and there by a way out of the unwanted behavior. I also don't think it wise to teach or otherwise encourage a dog to fight me. Any fighting that's to be done should be with the helper not the handler! I think this undermines your authority and teaches the dog one, your not to be trusted and two, there times when I will need to fight my handler. 
Dogs have an ingrained desire to follow rules if this were not so the living in a pack would not be possible. 

As to the time spend it really doesn't take a lot of time. when you figure in the fact that you don't need to work your dog everyday in order to teach or maintain good results. Actually once train the dog may benefit from not being worked everyday and sometimes maybe not all week. How many on here can put their dog up for a month and still have reliable behaviors without the use of collars(any kind) and a leash? 
Because of this you have time to train a couple dogs at the same time (on different days of the week). Not to mention your only spending 10-15 minutes may a little longer depending on the dog.

Lastly what's the rush you will progress as fast as the dog personal learning curve is. 
Tracey, we both are working with bull breeds and you are one of the ones who have been very, very successful winning Regional Championships and such. Congrats to you. But as you know our breed is notorious for being slow to mature so why try to keep them on a furry time line.

Also to my understanding in schutzhund the common age for dogs to start competing at one an half to two years of age. Where as in PSA the average age is two an half to three years of age. 

Again really what's the rush?


----------



## tracey schneider

I understand Bob's stance, i can actually relate to it. Just because he wants to challenge himself and his dog and see. Ok fair enough, I get that.=D>

Lynda, I dunno, I think I have and maintain a very special relationship with my dogs too. Who is to say who has a stronger bond? Getting in the dogs head, I only assume all good trainers/ handlers are doing that. To assume otherwise is not fair and probably not accurate. If there is a sudden glitch to the program, yeah of course look around for the obvious. If you are saying that giving a dog a correction ruins or hinders a relationship I will respectfully disagree. I think if the correction is fair and warranted, it can only help build it AND build the lines of communication. I think dogs need black/ white and some dogs will challenge that from time to time because they are "willful" and will test their boundaries. If you havent had a dog like this.... well ok. I dont think anyone is against positive training, however, I have no desire to dance around a dog that is clearly disobeying me when I can communicate to him with a fair correction that NO we will not be doing it your way today, and move on. 

On the bulldogs, its not bulldog specific and I personally dont like to use the crutch of "its a bulldog". I want my dogs doing as well as the other dogs in the club if not better (and some times they are :-D). I think the whole "slow maturity" thing is a crock that needs fixin. :twisted: I dont believe in 'stubborn' bulldogs (although id be lying if I said I never used the term lol), I believe in poor communication, conflict, willfullness/ determination, etc. You can have corrections w/o conflict.....

I guess my big question for you would be.... if tomorrow after all the foundation you have laid your dog gave you the finger.... and you corrected him fairly..... what do you think would happen? Do you think that would ruin your relationship? Hinder your training? What? To be clear by correction I mean non-emotional calmly spoken and strongly and clearly executed... not yelling, screaming, nagging, etc.

And for those that may think I am picking on Lynda lol.... I am not, just curious more than anything.:wink:

t

On the time frame, what is your time frame with your dogs or really anyone's dogs that train this way to title? Im in no rush, but Im not gonna spend time on something I can fix quickly when I know there will be other things that will need the time.


----------



## Joby Becker

Some people have dogs that love to give the finger, that doesn't mean that they don't have the right bond, or that are not in the dogs head. Some dogs are just azzholes and will walk all over you...if they are allowed to...some dogs need corrections...

I love positive/motivational, I am very glad that I learned it, it is awesome. I see no way of teaching certain things that is better, in my mind. 

It just ain't gonna work for every dog for every skill...


----------



## Christopher Jones

I dont know, maybe Im just simple.
You reward the correct behaviour and correct the wrong behaviour. The bigger you make the difference between the correct behaviour and the wrong behaviour, the more clear and fair it is to the dog.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Christopher Jones said:


> I dont know, maybe Im just simple.
> You reward the correct behaviour and correct the wrong behaviour. The bigger you make the difference between the correct behaviour and the wrong behaviour, the more clear and fair it is to the dog.



couldnt agree with you more! its black and white...no room for shady grey area's


----------



## Julie Ann Alvarez

tracey delin said:


> I understand Bob's stance, i can actually relate to it. Just because he wants to challenge himself and his dog and see. Ok fair enough, I get that.=D>
> 
> Lynda, I dunno, I think I have and maintain a very special relationship with my dogs too. Who is to say who has a stronger bond? Getting in the dogs head, I only assume all good trainers/ handlers are doing that. To assume otherwise is not fair and probably not accurate. If there is a sudden glitch to the program, yeah of course look around for the obvious. If you are saying that giving a dog a correction ruins or hinders a relationship I will respectfully disagree. I think if the correction is fair and warranted, it can only help build it AND build the lines of communication. I think dogs need black/ white and some dogs will challenge that from time to time because they are "willful" and will test their boundaries. If you havent had a dog like this.... well ok. I dont think anyone is against positive training, however, I have no desire to dance around a dog that is clearly disobeying me when I can communicate to him with a fair correction that NO we will not be doing it your way today, and move on.
> 
> On the bulldogs, its not bulldog specific and I personally dont like to use the crutch of "its a bulldog". I want my dogs doing as well as the other dogs in the club if not better (and some times they are :-D). I think the whole "slow maturity" thing is a crock that needs fixin. :twisted: I dont believe in 'stubborn' bulldogs (although id be lying if I said I never used the term lol), I believe in poor communication, conflict, willfullness/ determination, etc. You can have corrections w/o conflict.....
> 
> I guess my big question for you would be.... if tomorrow after all the foundation you have laid your dog gave you the finger.... and you corrected him fairly..... what do you think would happen? Do you think that would ruin your relationship? Hinder your training? What? To be clear by correction I mean non-emotional calmly spoken and strongly and clearly executed... not yelling, screaming, nagging, etc.
> 
> And for those that may think I am picking on Lynda lol.... I am not, just curious more than anything.:wink:
> 
> t
> 
> On the time frame, what is your time frame with your dogs or really anyone's dogs that train this way to title? Im in no rush, but Im not gonna spend time on something I can fix quickly when I know there will be other things that will need the time.


Well said Tracey. Quite diplomatic I think. 

I hate the "he's a bulldog" bs that every one likes to use.... He's a dog period. Train it and move on. The very same issues that bulldog owners experience with their very special "nerve bags" or "shitter"- other dog breeds also experience.... POS are POS (insert breed here- it doesn't matter they come in all sizes and shapes just like people).

I use what ever works to train my dogs. I will not get locked into any one method. The quickest way to show them what I want seems like the smartest thing to me. Black and white- stupid simple.

Julie


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Doug Zaga said:


> I was introduced to postitive rewards based training with my recent Rottweiler having attended an Ellis seminar and my trainer being a student of the system.
> 
> I will say this...my Rotti does great on positive rewards based training but I am NO fool to think I could get him trial ready without aversives/compulsion. Just Saturday the stubborn muthf*ker didn't listen, he got pissed, I corrected him, he got pissed more at me, he got another correction, he tagged my right forearm good, I grabbed him by the throat and.... Anyways, after he got his color back we moved on.
> 
> Just Sayn!


Doug, my male Mal is not handler aggressive. He's really quite biddable and loves to work with me. However, in certain training venues, particularly herding, he may get so high into drive, *IF* I try to "correct him down" with an e-collar or prong, his little Malinois brain will shut down and he will not learn a darn thing. He just gets too darn hysterical if he's really in drive. I'm lucky he's not handler aggressive or he would have eaten my lunch by now, I guarantee it. Because he still really likes to work, I use negative punishment to take him away from the stock. Only then when I take him away from the source of fun (the stock) does he realize that I mean business and that he needs to not be a block head and think. :mrgreen:

If a dog really wants to work, just play "game over" and the game ends and he gets put up to think about it. Call it a time out if you will, but it's much less confrontational to simply control the fun resource. Again, it takes a very patient TD/instructor, but it fortunately saves him from getting the tar zapped out of him so he can actually learn. Also helps with not correcting when you're mad or frustrated, because that again is very difficult to give a good, FAIR correction 100% of the time. Almost everyone I've met (I am no exception!!!) who uses correction will admit to correcting or overcorrecting a dog in anger or frustration. I probably wouldn't require my dog to perform a behavior 100% of the time if I can't correct fairly and appropriately 100% of the time. *shrug* I saw this cause I wonder what would have happened if you would have told your Rottie "nope, all done," put him up with no emotion, and not let him work for like 10-20 minutes.


----------



## Joby Becker

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Doug, my male Mal is not handler aggressive. He's really quite biddable and loves to work with me. However, in certain training venues, particularly herding, he may get so high into drive, *IF* I try to "correct him down" with an e-collar or prong, his little Malinois brain will shut down and he will not learn a darn thing. He just gets too darn hysterical if he's really in drive. I'm lucky he's not handler aggressive or he would have eaten my lunch by now, I guarantee it. Because he still really likes to work, I use negative punishment to take him away from the stock. Only then when I take him away from the source of fun (the stock) does he realize that I mean business and that he needs to not be a block head and think. :mrgreen:
> 
> If a dog really wants to work, just play "game over" and the game ends and he gets put up to think about it. Call it a time out if you will, but it's much less confrontational to simply control the fun resource. Again, it takes a very patient TD/instructor, but it fortunately saves him from getting the tar zapped out of him so he can actually learn. Also helps with not correcting when you're mad or frustrated, because that again is very difficult to give a good, FAIR correction 100% of the time. Almost everyone I've met (I am no exception!!!) who uses correction will admit to correcting or overcorrecting a dog in anger or frustration. I probably wouldn't require my dog to perform a behavior 100% of the time if I can't correct fairly and appropriately 100% of the time. *shrug* I saw this cause I wonder what would have happened if you would have told your Rottie "nope, all done," put him up with no emotion, and not let him work for like 10-20 minutes.


This is a good example thanks for posting, works for you with a biddable dog, in this instance. So are you also not using any corrections with the dog?


----------



## Aamer Sachedina

Doug Zaga said:


> I was introduced to postitive rewards based training with my recent Rottweiler having attended an Ellis seminar and my trainer being a student of the system.


For the record, I have never known Michael to claim that he is a positive only trainer. He uses all four quadrants as necessary and is intelligent about how he uses them. He was actually instrumental in breaking me out the +ve only streak that I was on in the past.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

tracey delin said:


> to quote easily....
> 
> copy and paste text into your reply. Highlight text you want to quote and then click the button above (4th from the right) that looks like the "speak box" in a comic strip. Done.:grin:
> 
> I am curious, why would anyone WANT to train 100% motivationally? Looking at Lynda, she uses compulsion at home for manners... so there is a chance the dog carries these corrections over any way, esp if somewhat soft. Terrisita says she isnt opposed to using it if need be (correct me if Im wrong) same for Bob, we all agree it takes much longer...... so I cant help but shake my head, why would I spend all that time when i can make it black and white in one session? Please explain.........
> 
> t


 
See for me it does't make it black and white in one session; especially to teach a behavior. It can be black and white regarding stopping a behavior. As far as time is concerned, I usually have all the patience in the world. I'd rather relate to a dog a certain way---that's it plain and simple and I'm not competition driven. Also for what I do, I get better consistency and less stress/conflict. I don't really like the train by collar method and never did. I quit competitive obedience when they claimed I needed to compulsively train an obsessive retriever. I'd rather run the positive system through all aspects [variable/intermittent reinforcement and all distractions or scenarios the dogs might see in the work] before even thinking about correction based training. I WISH my present two dogs had been started with the Balabanov/Ellis type positive approach. I guess for me I ENJOY the training process and discovering what makes the dog tick. As far as a because I say so button or if you have corrected the dog with manners training, it doesn't carry over other than stress/conflict. I had a perfectly obedient dog that could go ANYWHERE. She was also flat and what I call resistant. Its the frame of mind that I'm after with motivational and having been taught to learn that way its very easy to TEACH knew things and no CONFUSION. 

If you are in a hurry and like a faster route, then no you wouldn't do it. Like I said before, its not 100% objective because what the handler and dog bring to the table can dictate success or failure. Some people just plain like their collars. Some like motivational. Different strokes for different folks. Some folks wanna apply a "stim" and work with the dog's desire to avoid an adversive. Some folks want the dog to work to acquire a positive.

Terrasita


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Joby Becker said:


> This is a good example thanks for posting, works for you with a biddable dog, in this instance. So are you also not using any corrections with the dog?


No, I personally think such a thing does not exist to be "only" positive. But that being said, if we're running obedience (say for PSA), I do it 95%+ positive only. I train with Lynda and she'd hopefully agree. I'll give another example. I have to drive about 2 hours each way to train for PSA, so the dogs are sitting being squirrelly in the crates for quite a while. So whenever I'd go out to St. Louis to train, Fawkes in particular would not look his best. We were going to try to trial for the TC (the PSA 1 level obedience) in our July trial as his protection foundation was not quite there for the PDC. Unfortunately, they have since done away with the TC, which no one knew until the night before the trial, d'oh! 

Anyways, I was getting a little frustrated because I was getting really good heeling at home and at the park I train at near my house, but out in St. Louis 2 hours away, it was maybe 60-70% as good. So trial's coming up in a few weeks, so I want to make sure everything looks good, so I break out the e-collar and the prong collar. What does it do? Makes him more unreliable and more hectic with the conflict. Like using the e-collar on the heeling around the objects littering the ground, he'd actually jump out of the way because of the anticipation of correction (which wasn't even *that* high) instead of ignoring it as we walk over it. Ugh, that took a little bit of fixing... 

So the weekend before the trial, I say screw it and get to the training field about half an hour before everyone else and just play disc with him for 15 minutes. Takes the edge off of him and his heeling was REALLY really good. Got lots of nice comments like, "wow, haven't seen him look that good before!" I honestly hadn't done anything different other than just problem solve instead of just reach to crank up the e-collar to a higher stim level. I was pleased as punch and it's too bad we couldn't have trialed that next weekend since that one no longer exists. Anyways, my point is I could have upped and upped and upped the positive punishment, but I honestly don't think in my dog's case it would have helped. He just needs a little of the edge taken off before he can think and then he does fine. 

Here's a quandary for everyone though...how many "non-biddable" dogs (AKA the fire breathers) have we intentionally or unintentionally created because we as the handler brought a fight that could have been avoided just by taking a breath and a step back and re-evaluating WHY the dog didn't do what we wanted? In other words to paraphrase von Stephanitz, what are we as the trainer/handler doing wrong? :-k I will not argue there are not stubborn dogs out there or dogs who are in it only for themselves, but I wonder in cases like the one that Doug shared if it could have been avoided (thanks for the example, Doug, don't mean to call you out, btw).


----------



## Joby Becker

Maren Bell Jones said:


> No, I personally think such a thing does not exist to be "only" positive. But that being said, if we're running obedience (say for PSA), I do it 95%+ positive only. I train with Lynda and she'd hopefully agree.


do you train the bitework all positive?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

T said,


> Some folks wanna apply a "stim" and work with the dog's desire to avoid an adversive.


This is what Koehler is based on because it is the way animals learn in the real world. They learn about barbed wire fences, they learn about electric fences, they learn about porcupines and skunks because there is an adverse reaction to all of the above and most every thing else they learn in life. If they try to catch game the wrong way, they go hungry. They learn fast and, what is most important, they never forget it. 

When Jenniofer was working Jager, three sits was all you were going to get....treat or no treat. She put a prong collar on him and no matter how har he was corrected, he never stopped wagging his tail. Being put up was more cruel to this dog than hard compulsion. Treats meant nothing once he made up his mind. 

Getting in the dogs head seems to be the hot statement for this thread. I don't want in the dogs head, I would rather the dog be in my head. When I look at them when they are screwing up, they know what the look is. Me being in their head means nothing unless they are going to be in control. Since I am in control, it is up to them to read the body language....and they are darned good at that.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

My dog's case is a little strange as he had just about zero foundational work for bite work (other than tug for obedience) before age 3. I created a LOT of possession for the tug inadvertently which bled over into bitework big time by using a little too much Flinks, I think, as my previous Sch dog needed to build more possession. I think if I would have used a little more Ellis and a little less Flinks, it would have been much cleaner. So anyways, we do use corrections somewhat in the bitework (usually a prong coming from the decoy) or a third person, but usually not for the out itself per se quite so much as the almost immediate re-bite he thinks he deserves after he outs. ;-) If he wasn't so damn fast and if I was a better handler, it could probably have been solved soon enough, but anyways...interestingly, he's a dog that needs a lot of structure. If you tell him aus, he'll out, but often try to rebite as a self fullfilling reward and he's fast enough it's difficult to time it just so so that he doesn't. But tell him to aus, platz for a guard and he does much better. Sadly, let the Malinois think too much for him or herself and it all goes downhill. :lol: ;-)

Anyways, looking back, if I would have started 3 years ago what I know now, I think I could have gotten him almost if not 100% "positive." I prefer the dog thinking he's eventually going to get the reward of a rebite at some point instead of trying to wean them off 3 e-collars, 2 prong collars, 1 slip collar and a partridge in a pear tree for trial. :lol:


----------



## Joby Becker

Joby Becker said:


> do you train the bitework all positive?


I meant without corrections, not all positive..tried to edit it.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Don Turnipseed said:


> T said,
> 
> 
> This is what Koehler is based on because it is the way animals learn in the real world. They learn about barbed wire fences, they learn about electric fences, they learn about porcupines and skunks because there is an adverse reaction to all of the above and most every thing else they learn in life. If they try to catch game the wrong way, they go hungry. They learn fast and, what is most important, they never forget it.
> 
> When Jenniofer was working Jager, three sits was all you were going to get....treat or no treat. She put a prong collar on him and no matter how har he was corrected, he never stopped wagging his tail. Being put up was more cruel to this dog than hard compulsion. Treats meant nothing once he made up his mind.
> 
> Getting in the dogs head seems to be the hot statement for this thread. I don't want in the dogs head, I would rather the dog be in my head. When I look at them when they are screwing up, they know what the look is. Me being in their head means nothing unless they are going to be in control. Since I am in control, it is up to them to read the body language....and they are darned good at that.


 
So on this presumedly hard dog who didn't see food as a reward, positive punishment was ineffective. Reminds me of my husband's comment about Thor: once he plants his feet, not for anything are you gonna budge him. Again, work with what the dog sees as reward if you are gonna go this way. One of the things hey did with the Bar Harbor studies is not breed dogs with zero touch sensitivity because it make physical correction very difficult. One of the things Lynda hinted at is something we have discussed all the time. We have bred flight out and amped up fight to the point that its even fight the hand that feeds you. More may not be necessarily better. There is that word, balance. So you have a dog that you haven't figured out the reward for and he doesn't care about correction. What's his threshold for work before you have to put him up??? You have a form of work that doesn't rely on training affirmative behaviors. The look around the yard means what??? The whole communication thing is two-way, or that's at least what I strive for---my ability to read them and their ability to read me. Quite frankly, I'd say they are better at it and I'm getting there. That's again the glory of the marker system for me, to see how they process information which helps me communicate better when I'm teaching something. You want to control. I want something beyond that.

Terrasita


----------



## Joby Becker

Maren Bell Jones said:


> My dog's case is a little strange as he had just about zero foundational work for bite work (other than tug for obedience) before age 3. I created a LOT of possession for the tug inadvertently which bled over into bitework big time by using a little too much Flinks, I think, as my previous Sch dog needed to build more possession. I think if I would have used a little more Ellis and a little less Flinks, it would have been much cleaner. So anyways, we do use corrections somewhat in the bitework (usually a prong coming from the decoy) or a third person, but usually not for the out itself per se quite so much as the almost immediate re-bite he thinks he deserves after he outs. ;-) If he wasn't so damn fast and if I was a better handler, it could probably have been solved soon enough, but anyways...interestingly, he's a dog that needs a lot of structure. If you tell him aus, he'll out, but often try to rebite as a self fullfilling reward and he's fast enough it's difficult to time it just so so that he doesn't. But tell him to aus, platz for a guard and he does much better. Sadly, let the Malinois think too much for him or herself and it all goes downhill. :lol: ;-)
> 
> Anyways, looking back, if I would have started 3 years ago what I know now, I think I could have gotten him almost if not 100% "positive." I prefer the dog thinking he's eventually going to get the reward of a rebite at some point instead of trying to wean them off 3 e-collars, 2 prong collars, 1 slip collar and a partridge in a pear tree for trial. :lol:


so do you also believe that ANY dog regardless of his temperament can be trained 100% positive?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

I'm curious about something. There's always the discussion regarding dogs washing out due to the lack of nerves, bite whatever. Do any of them washout for lack of trainability? Is trainabiity a part of the selection/breeding process? Can you get the level of hardness, aggression that you like along with trainabiity? How do you define trainability?

Terrasita


----------



## Konnie Hein

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Anyways, I was getting a little frustrated because I was getting really good heeling at home and at the park I train at near my house, but out in St. Louis 2 hours away, it was maybe 60-70% as good. So trial's coming up in a few weeks, so I want to make sure everything looks good, so I break out the e-collar and the prong collar. What does it do? Makes him more unreliable and more hectic with the conflict. Like using the e-collar on the heeling around the objects littering the ground, he'd actually jump out of the way because of the anticipation of correction (which wasn't even *that* high) instead of ignoring it as we walk over it. Ugh, that took a little bit of fixing...


Had you properly conditioned him to these tools prior to using them? Did you teach him how to avoid the stim by "correcting" his behavior?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I want control, yes I do. If you have no con tol of your dogs something is wrong and I see a lot of that.
I want them in my head but not just for the screw ups, they know they have done good just as well and they love the praise with no clicks or treats. The dogs know when they are doing good. All animals learn through experience. This is comfortable...this isn't. Seems pretty simple. They understand discomfort and comfort no matter how complicated we try to make it. So do we for that matter.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Yes, he knows what the e-collar means. When we go out on the trails, the e-collars are just about always on for safety's sake in the recall, so he's well acclimated to them. I don't use the prong nearly as often, but he gets that too. He'd just go into overt avoidance of the object instead of being neutral for it because there are high priority objects (tennis balls, tugs, etc) littered on the ground where you do your heeling pattern that he went for initially and I corrected him with a decently high correction. We got it sorted out pretty quickly though and now he just ignores whatever for the most part (having him heel over a moderately high object and being rewarded with his very favorite tug or disc instead when he did it correctly).


----------



## Lynda Myers

tracey delin said:


> I understand Bob's stance, i can actually relate to it. Just because he wants to challenge himself and his dog and see. Ok fair enough, I get that.=D>
> 
> Lynda, I dunno, I think I have and maintain a very special relationship with my dogs too. Who is to say who has a stronger bond? Getting in the dogs head, I only assume all good trainers/ handlers are doing that. To assume otherwise is not fair and probably not accurate. If there is a sudden glitch to the program, yeah of course look around for the obvious. If you are saying that giving a dog a correction ruins or hinders a relationship I will respectfully disagree. I think if the correction is fair and warranted, it can only help build it AND build the lines of communication. I think dogs need black/ white and some dogs will challenge that from time to time because they are "willful" and will test their boundaries. If you havent had a dog like this.... well ok. I dont think anyone is against positive training, however, I have no desire to dance around a dog that is clearly disobeying me when I can communicate to him with a fair correction that NO we will not be doing it your way today, and move on.
> 
> On the bulldogs, its not bulldog specific and I personally dont like to use the crutch of "its a bulldog". I want my dogs doing as well as the other dogs in the club if not better (and some times they are :-D). I think the whole "slow maturity" thing is a crock that needs fixin. :twisted: I dont believe in 'stubborn' bulldogs (although id be lying if I said I never used the term lol), I believe in poor communication, conflict, willfullness/ determination, etc. You can have corrections w/o conflict.....
> 
> I guess my big question for you would be.... if tomorrow after all the foundation you have laid your dog gave you the finger.... and you corrected him fairly..... what do you think would happen? Do you think that would ruin your relationship? Hinder your training? What? To be clear by correction I mean non-emotional calmly spoken and strongly and clearly executed... not yelling, screaming, nagging, etc.
> 
> And for those that may think I am picking on Lynda lol.... I am not, just curious more than anything.:wink:
> 
> t
> 
> On the time frame, what is your time frame with your dogs or really anyone's dogs that train this way to title? Im in no rush, but Im not gonna spend time on something I can fix quickly when I know there will be other things that will need the time.


Tracey it's not about who has a stronger bond those are your words not mine. I never said or implied that others had weak bonds with their dogs. It's hard to explain but all I can say is until you have trained a dog or two strictly the way I was taught your not going to understand. When you remove the default of because I said so and have to use what motivates the dog to want too instead of have too. It produces a different kind of communication/ bond/relationship.
Honestly I don't know they don't given me the finger.LOL All of my dogs are biddable with Rook being extremely biddable. 
But seriously more the likely nothing. Will my relationship be ruined probably not. The question for me would be what has it done to enhance or promote a good or better one. Will it hinder my training quite possibly. Because there's a chance I could misread the dog, or worst correct way too strongly. I'm very old school here if your going to use physical corrections then make it count for something so ya don't have to revisit it . And no my dogs are not handler sensitive as I don't like those types of dogs. My last pitbull was handler soft and it was making me crazy. As my mannerism is kinda forcefully so I had to be careful when working him.

Don't know how the others feel on this but the real questions should be how good is one's interaction with their dog, and how skillful they in their ability to use this method?
For me there's no set time table I wait until I see a settling of the mind before thinking about competition. this is one thing that can not be accelerated with training regardless of the method used. Mental maturity happens at various ages but roughly around one an half years old. 
I start training and preparing from day one. Take Katara who is now 9 mos old for instance. I acquired her at 9 - 10 weeks old she knows almost all of the behaviors OB wise (as well as the flat retrieve) for the BH and the PDC. Now it's time for linking them all together and fine tuning the routines. Realistically she should be ready next Spring for the BH and following with the PDC in the Fall of 2011 .

As to being bulldog specific I agree that we shouldn't make excuses for the bulldogs. But in the same breath to treat as if the were not bulldogs doesn't help either. Because they are bulldogs and are going to relate to the world as such. I don't see the slow maturity thing as a negative. Actually see it as a benefit because it affords me time to train the way that I do. I mean honestly what's the rush anyway? If it were all about competing then would I really have chosen a off breed to do it with? No because the sport would be more important then the breed.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Yes, he knows what the e-collar means. When we go out on the trails, the e-collars are just about always on for safety's sake in the recall, so he's well acclimated to them. I don't use the prong nearly as often, but he gets that too. He'd just go into overt avoidance of the object instead of being neutral for it because there are high priority objects (tennis balls, tugs, etc) littered on the ground where you do your heeling pattern that he went for initially and I corrected him with a decently high correction. We got it sorted out pretty quickly though and now he just ignores whatever for the most part.


To me, just because you use an ecollar on hikes for a recall or high stim for distractions doesn't mean he's been properly conditioned to it. Properly conditioning a dog to the ecollar means a completely different thing to me - it means teaching the dog how to "yield" to the stim by correcting his mistake. So if he's out of position on the heel and I stim him, he knows exactly how to shut off the stim by moving his body into the correct position. He knows that, because I taught it to him - first with very low stim (and guiding him into the correct position if necessary and shutting off the stim when he's there), and then working up to the high end of low or medium stim depending on his level of "energy" (or drive) at the moment. This is all after he's already learned the correct behavior using positive reinforcement and marker training.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Konnie Hein said:


> To me, just because you use an ecollar on hikes for a recall or high stim for distractions doesn't mean he's been properly conditioned to it. Properly conditioning a dog to the ecollar means a completely different thing to me - it means teaching the dog how to "yield" to the stim by correcting his mistake. So if he's out of position on the heel and I stim him, he knows exactly how to shut off the stim by moving his body into the correct position. He knows that, because I taught it to him - first with very low stim (and guiding him into the correct position if necessary and shutting off the stim when he's there), and then working up to the high end of low or medium stim depending on his level of "energy" (or drive) at the moment. This is all after he's already learned the correct behavior using positive reinforcement and marker training.


 
Okay, I was with you until the last sentence. If he truly learned it with PR/Marker, why did guide him to the correct position and then turn it off. Did he really learn it in the first place?

Terrasita


----------



## Konnie Hein

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Okay, I was with you until the last sentence. If he truly learned it with PR/Marker, why did guide him to the correct position and then turn it off. Did he really learn it in the first place?
> 
> Terrasita


Semantics.


----------



## Joby Becker

Konnie Hein said:


> So if he's out of position on the heel and I stim him, he knows exactly how to shut off the stim by moving his body into the correct position. He knows that, because I taught it to him - first with very low stim (and guiding him into the correct position if necessary and shutting off the stim when he's there), and then working up to the high end of low or medium stim depending on his level of "energy" (or drive) at the moment. This is all after he's already learned the correct behavior using positive reinforcement and marker training.


So after the "learning", you use the stim to re-enforce correctness, just as you would by using a toy or food in the same situation if the dog was not as perfect as you would want him to be, if you trained with no corrections??


----------



## Konnie Hein

I use the ecollar for a correction, but my point was that the dog knows how to "escape" the correction by changing his behavior (to what I want). There's prep work involved in that for me, and I was describing the prep work. If he doesn't know how to turn off the stim, you might get a dog that does what Maren described. JME.


----------



## Joby Becker

Konnie Hein said:


> I use the ecollar for a correction, but my point was that the dog knows how to "escape" the correction by changing his behavior (to what I want). There's prep work involved in that for me, and I was describing the prep work. If he doesn't know how to turn off the stim, you might get a dog that does what Maren described. JME.


my point was that you used the correction in this manner exactly the same as a positive only would work on this particular instance, after the learning was done and the dog was not as perfect as you and the dog knew it could be...you just used aversive instead of positive...so very comparable to a positive only approach, just different...semantics put aside


----------



## tracey schneider

> Well said Tracey. Quite diplomatic I think.


Yeah I try lol.



> I use what ever works to train my dogs. I will not get locked into any one method. The quickest way to show them what I want seems like the smartest thing to me. Black and white- stupid simple.


I agree, why limit? And LOVE “stupid simple” lol



> See for me it does't make it black and white in one session; especially to teach a behavior. It can be black and white regarding stopping a behavior.


How quickly a dog catches on with what method of teaching has too many variables. So then we agree …. And probably most do. =D>



> Also for what I do, I get better consistency and less stress/conflict.


Then I would say you are using the method that best suits your skills…. If you cant train with corrections without getting stress or conflict and damaging the relationship you have with your dog.... then yeah probably not the way to go. Stress/ conflict shouldn’t be an issue unless someone is correcting unfairly OR not thinking through to a better solution, corrections are not always the answer but sometimes they are. Sometimes stress can be a good thing as well.....;-)



> I'd rather run the positive system through all aspects before even thinking about correction based training.


Do you understand that the proofing is really the biggest difference between how you train and how the many train? Esp those using marker based training/ teaching?



> I guess for me I ENJOY the training process and discovering what makes the dog tick.


Me too, love it in fact, and I would guess most folks do also.



> As far as a because I say so button or if you have corrected the dog with manners training, it doesn't carry over other than stress/conflict. Its the frame of mind that I'm after with motivational and having been taught to learn that way its very easy to TEACH knew things and no CONFUSION.


This is the same for most again. No one is questioning the TEACHING….. 



> Like I said before, its not 100% objective because what the handler and dog bring to the table can dictate success or failure.


Always………in any method……



> It's hard to explain but all I can say is until you have trained a dog or two strictly the way I was taught your not going to understand. When you remove the default of because I said so and have to use what motivates the dog to want too instead of have too. It produces a different kind of communication/ bond/relationship.


Again, you understand most of us train very similarly, its not about the training/ teaching its about the proofing… that is the big difference. So to say I have no idea or don’t understand is not a fair statement when you don’t train with me or most in on this discussion lol. 



> The question for me would be what has it done to enhance or promote a good or better one.


Takes out the grey…. Clear communication, black and white.



> Will it hinder my training quite possibly. Because there's a chance I could misread the dog, or worst correct way too strongly. I'm very old school here if your going to use physical corrections then make it count for something so ya don't have to revisit it . And no my dogs are not handler sensitive as I don't like those types of dogs. My last pitbull was handler soft and it was making me crazy. As my mannerism is kinda forcefully so I had to be careful when working him.


Um, ok so as you would say others haven’t fully grasped no correction you haven’t mastered corrections? So in that stance, it is the best way for you to teach.:wink: If you cant give corrections w/o creating conflict and stress and damaging the relationship I understand why you train this way. That is the “why” I was looking for. Got it. Im gonna be a friendly jerk for a second as I wonder out loud.... then are you truly able to read your dog to the extent of those that can use corrections proficiently and effectively without strees/ conflict/ damage to the relationship? Also, I am curious how do you know how soft they are if you don’t use corrections? 



> Don't know how the others feel on this but the real questions should be how good is one's interaction with their dog, and how skillful they in their ability to use this method?


True of any method……



> I mean honestly what's the rush anyway? If it were all about competing then would I really have chosen an off breed to do it with? No because the sport would be more important then the breed.


Ok but for me, there is no way in hell Im waiting around on any dog…. If I cant see what I want and the hints of it by 6 months… Im not gonna hold onto it with my fingers crossed, just simple difference of opinion:-D.

t


----------



## Jim Nash

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> I'm curious about something. There's always the discussion regarding dogs washing out due to the lack of nerves, bite whatever. Do any of them washout for lack of trainability? Is trainabiity a part of the selection/breeding process? Can you get the level of hardness, aggression that you like along with trainabiity? How do you define trainability?
> 
> Terrasita


In the new K9 classes I trained we failed dogs for nerves(bite , environmetal issues , etc.) , search work and health . We can train all of them in OB , tracking , area search , article search , drug , bomb , etc. . But if we have a healthy dog , it's confidence problems that get them washed . Nerve issues with manwork (biting or confronting upon locating at the end of a search) and nerve issues with environmental things like slick floors , stairs , dark spaces , etc. . 


I've never seen a dog washed for lack of trainabilty .


----------



## Jim Nash

I'd just like to add that I did come across one we almost washed because of trainabilty . He was extreme in everything . Motivational only went so far with him since you couldn't get an out off ANYTHING at first for a very long time . Hard to reward with a kong or tug if you can't get it away from him and food meant nothing to him . He would latch on to things out of nowhere (discarded pop bottles , cans , sticks and other assorted trash ) for no other reason but to posses them and yes we do use the waiting out technique . Works good for some dogs but for some it can be life threatening with how long and how much energy they will burn to hold on to that item . Corrections were a problem too because he seemed not to feel any pain to the point we thought it might be a neurological problem because we had never seen anything like it . The dog would run into things full speed and not flinch or learn . Prong , ecollar , chain , whatever he didn't feel it . It was a long process but were able to get him there and motivational techniques along with compulsion did play a part . His only toy type reward ended up being curved peices of pvc since it was harder to hold on to for him and eventually easier to finally get from him .

He was a good street dog but had to be retired early after being shoot in the muzzle . He was making a comeback but we found the damage to his nose and jaw was too severe , during training . He did have some issues with gunfire also after the shooting but I'm sure we could have got him through it if his health was better . Just wasn't worth it and honestly a PSD without scenting capabilities isn't worth much since that's 90% of what they are used for . 

This somewhat relates to what others were talking about and the waiting game in teaching the out . Like I've said before we use it but with some dogs it can be life threatening and surely not motivational in the positive sence most are talking about . We had to adjust that game for 1 dog who simply could out last the helper . So we found a big tree that was angled toward the ground , we threw a long tracking lead over a branch to form a harness for the helper(me) to slide my sleeve into once the dog was on . The dog was sent and once on the bite I crawled up the main part of the tree and once the dog was off his feet I put the end of the sleeve in the lope of the tracking lead for support . I now had support for my back and arm and just waited . It took about 40 minutes and the dog outed(fatigued) and was sent on the second helper and the processes started again . I think this lasted about 20-30 minutes and after fatiguing again outted and was rewarded with a tug . This certainly wasn't a positive experiance for the dog . We did it the next day and the first session lengthened then we finally got to shorter times . It did help to get him to finally realize what out meant and we then were able to clean it up through a combination of other motivational but primarily correction based techniques . His OB in bitework eventually improved so much he was on our 2000 National Championship team and won some individual trophies in bitework of all things . 


I'm not trying to come off like all I do is deal with extreme dogs . I don't the dogs I train run from borderline to extreme but I've dealt with alot of dogs and all I can say is Lynda if you really think you can train ALL dogs 100% positive , you simply haven't seen enough dogs .

Again I'm all for motivational/positive training and think it should be used as far as possible in teaching a dog . But with many a time will come were corrections and complusion may have to come in . I personally think these exagerated claims that it can work on ALL dogs only hurts in promoting a very good training technique because most knowledgable folks just ain't buying it and will shut you out once it's brought up in a training discussion because of that .


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jim Nash said:


> I'd just like to add that I did come across one we almost washed because of trainabilty . He was extreme in everything . Motivational only went so far with him since you couldn't get an out off ANYTHING at first for a very long time . Hard to reward with a kong or tug if you can't get it away from him and food meant nothing to him . He would latch on to things out of nowhere (discarded pop bottles , cans , sticks and other assorted trash ) for no other reason but to posses them and yes we do use the waiting out technique . Works good for some dogs but for some it can be life threatening with how long and how much energy they will burn to hold on to that item . Corrections were a problem too because he seemed not to feel any pain to the point we thought it might be a neurological problem because we had never seen anything like it . The dog would run into things full speed and not flinch or learn . Prong , ecollar , chain , whatever he didn't feel it . It was a long process but were able to get him there and motivational techniques along with compulsion did play a part . His only toy type reward ended up being curved peices of pvc since it was harder to hold on to for him and eventually easier to finally get from him .
> 
> He was a good street dog but had to be retired early after being shoot in the muzzle . He was making a comeback but we found the damage to his nose and jaw was too severe , during training . He did have some issues with gunfire also after the shooting but I'm sure we could have got him through it if his health was better . Just wasn't worth it and honestly a PSD without scenting capabilities isn't worth much since that's 90% of what they are used for .
> 
> This somewhat relates to what others were talking about and the waiting game in teaching the out . Like I've said before we use it but with some dogs it can be life threatening and surely not motivational in the positive sence most are talking about . We had to adjust that game for 1 dog who simply could out last the helper . So we found a big tree that was angled toward the ground , we threw a long tracking lead over a branch to form a harness for the helper(me) to slide my sleeve into once the dog was on . The dog was sent and once on the bite I crawled up the main part of the tree and once the dog was off his feet I put the end of the sleeve in the lope of the tracking lead for support . I now had support for my back and arm and just waited . It took about 40 minutes and the dog outed(fatigued) and was sent on the second helper and the processes started again . I think this lasted about 20-30 minutes and after fatiguing again outted and was rewarded with a tug . This certainly wasn't a positive experiance for the dog . We did it the next day and the first session lengthened then we finally got to shorter times . It did help to get him to finally realize what out meant and we then were able to clean it up through a combination of other motivational but primarily correction based techniques . His OB in bitework eventually improved so much he was on our 2000 National Championship team and won some individual trophies in bitework of all things .
> 
> 
> I'm not trying to come off like all I do is deal with extreme dogs . I don't the dogs I train run from borderline to extreme but I've dealt with alot of dogs and all I can say is Lynda if you really think you can train ALL dogs 100% positive , you simply haven't seen enough dogs .
> 
> Again I'm all for motivational/positive training and think it should be used as far as possible in teaching a dog . But with many a time will come were corrections and complusion may have to come in . I personally think these exagerated claims that it can work on ALL dogs only hurts in promoting a very good training technique because most knowledgable folks just ain't buying it and will shut you out once it's brought up in a training discussion because of that .


Hi Jim:

And thanks for the explanation above. I'm always interested in some of the law enforcement aspects and how it transfers to reliability on the street. I know you can work it through with the extreme even though it can be a PITA. But is that type of dog the desired. Although you play the hand you're dealt, I wouldn't WANT the borderline. Somewhere along the spectrum is the ideal that gives you both I would think. I think you also operate under a time contstaint in getting the dog through the program??? Lynda and Bob have seen the type of dog you described worked through this. I came along afterwards and watched the process with another dog. I think thats why she talks in terms of absolute. I agree the use of the absolute have made people just plant their feet and put all their energy and thought into rejecting it outright or just focusing on refuting it in. Its really just turned into Lynda said, Lynda said, Lynda said. 

Ohhhhhh and I do like the creativity of the tree.


Terrasita


----------



## Lynda Myers

> Again, you understand most of us train very similarly, its not about the training/ teaching its about the proofing… that is the big difference. So to say I have no idea or don’t understand is not a fair statement when you don’t train with me or most in on this discussion lol.


Sure I can because first off the topic wasn't about your method it is about the one I use. Which very few on here use in the way that I do. So my initial statement stands.
Now going off other conversations on here I've gathered you've never trained a dog all the way through without the use of physical corrections for proofing. This in and of it's self determines your outlook as to it's value as a stand only training method. As well as how much effort or time goes into teaching a behavior. Knowing all the time your going to clean up with the collar. Because of this you're not motivated to use the method in a way that would eliminate the need for proofing with a collar. And no you can't understand what I'm talking about simply because you haven't did it.




> Takes out the grey…. Clear communication, black and white.


Really...I've watched the videos of Blanco it's apparent he's a fun dog for sure to work. But is it really as black and white as you say? Blanco looked confused in the blind search and when he looked back at you in confusion you rewarded him with a stim/shock. IT didn't look very black and white to me. Were you correcting for looking back or for not running the blind? Seems to me he didn't know the behavior as well as you thought. I personally would have gone back a step in training. To correct before the dog knows the behavior is unfair in my opinion. 
Ok if he known the behavior then why didn't he carry it out? How do "you" determine when the dog knows the behavior? What is your measuring stick?



> Um, ok so as you would say others haven’t fully grasped no correction you haven’t mastered corrections? So in that stance, it is the best way for you to teach. If you cant give corrections w/o creating conflict and stress and damaging the relationship I understand why you train this way. That is the “why” I was looking for. Got it. Im gonna be a friendly jerk for a second as I wonder out loud.... then are you truly able to read your dog to the extent of those that can use corrections proficiently and effectively without strees/ conflict/ damage to the relationship? Also, I am curious how do you know how soft they are if you don’t use corrections?


LOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOL this might be if I didn't use physical corrections for manners.
it's not that I can't do it because I have in years past used it in training for other tings. No one is a 100% and I have witness far more stress, conflict and damage produced by those using a more hands on approach. Quite a few who are certified Master Dog Trainers!!!! So please don't try to make correction based training all warm and fuzzy because it is not. Very few people can use in a manner that doesn't produce stress. 
Are "you" truly able to read your dog to the extent of those that can use motivational methods. Again I ask you were you correcting the dog for looking back or for not searching the blind? Because he did look confused when he looked back. And how did he know which behavior he it was being corrected for?
To answer your question how do I know how hard or soft my dog is? Easy I let my helper show me what's in my dog. A dog coming up the leash does so in protest of the correction. LOL What did he really learn? News flash if he's fighting you he's not learning what your trying to teach. But what you did manage to teach is it's possible to retaliate on you the handler. So whether you believe or not in your dog's eyes you have lower your position to being equal with him. So now you have open the door for him to challenge you because you've showed him that you equal in position of authority. That's not what I'm trying to teach. I personally would bash a dog's head in for this. At no time is it ever ok to bite me or act like your going too. Besides if I can get what you get without a collar why should I use one? Not to mention if the need every arose that a physical correction was warranted I have a whole array of untouched tools to choose from. Which will be very affective because they have not been over used and the dog hasn't built up a tolerance or otherwise become desensitized to them.



> Ok but for me, there is no way in hell Im waiting around on any dog…. If I cant see what I want and the hints of it by 6 months… Im not gonna hold onto it with my fingers crossed, just simple difference of opinion.



I think we're talking about two different things here. I'm talking about waiting on the settling of the mind not waiting on the pup to show whether or not it has the necessary traits for a given work. i won't wait six months for that. Either the pup has it or he doesn't this will be evident at a much younger age. Sure it's a little harder if you didn't whelped the litter. But if you have there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to know which ones have it and which one don't at 5-8 weeks. old.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Hi Jim:
> 
> Its really just turned into Lynda said, Lynda said, Lynda said.
> 
> Terrasita


It's the E. F. Hutton effect.:-\"


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Don Turnipseed said:


> I want control, yes I do. If you have no con tol of your dogs something is wrong and I see a lot of that.
> I want them in my head but not just for the screw ups, they know they have done good just as well and they love the praise with no clicks or treats. The dogs know when they are doing good._* All animals learn through experience. This is comfortable...this isn't. Seems pretty simple. They understand discomfort and comfort no matter how complicated we try to make it.*_ So do we for that matter.



A very simple yet TRUE statement....well said Don


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Lynda Myers said:


> this might be if I didn't use physical corrections for manners.


IMO this one statement negates the entire "I train positively only" claim. If you use corrections at home, then you don't "train without compulsion", you "train without compulsion some of the time, and use compulsion other times". Which is actually how many of us train. But also, since you use corrections at home, when you are training "without compulsion" you are using the effects of the compulsion at home in your training. You said in a previous post that you just use body language/threat for a correction, and that's all you need. That body language carries the threat it carries in part because of the compulsion you use at home. The dog knows there might be something more to it then just the threat. If there was never any backing up of the threat, the dog would eventually learn to call your bluff, unless they were really really sensitive.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> And no you can't understand what I'm talking about simply because you haven't did it.


 *remember tho that it goes both ways ! We apparantly dont understand you since we have never done it yet (according to your assumption) yet the same can be said about you in this case.....you can not state you understand our dogs or ways of training if you have never worked or trained with either...or with any of us for that matter 


*


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> It's the E. F. Hutton effect.:-\"


LOL good one but slightly of base since "When E. F. Hutton talks, people listen" 

and when "Lynda Myers talks, people question" 

dont get answered tho but thats beside the point


----------



## maggie fraser

Kadi Thingvall said:


> IMO this one statement negates the entire "I train positively only" claim. If you use corrections at home, then you don't "train without compulsion", you "train without compulsion some of the time, and use compulsion other times". Which is actually how many of us train. But also, since you use corrections at home, when you are training "without compulsion" you are using the effects of the compulsion at home in your training. You said in a previous post that you just use body language/threat for a correction, and that's all you need. That body language carries the threat it carries in part because of the compulsion you use at home. The dog knows there might be something more to it then just the threat. If there was never any backing up of the threat, the dog would eventually learn to call your bluff, unless they were really really sensitive.


This has been the very inconsistency for me here too.. 

I have been interpreting Lynda's claim as it being possible to train with motivational methods (in exclusion to physical corrections), as being possible with dogs of different breeds across the disciplines. Obviously not 100% because that is an impossible claim to make for any reasonable person... the reasons why have been stated on this thread.

Is everyone agreed on that ?

Lynda???

This thread is doing my head in!


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I love it. T just doesn't want to take the time to train her dogs to stay out of the garbage and eat food off the counters. Lynda says she uses com-pulsion to teach manners such as no countersurfing and not getting into the garbage. They keep referring to it as "manners". No one has picked up on this as of yet but it isn't that manners is the problem, it is that these are very natural things for a dog to do as they are opportunistic. The problem is not teaching a dog something that is not natural, but, so much of training dogs is to over ride the natural instincts. This is the catch 22 of the motivational world and why it's proponents don't teach manners. You cannot break natural instincts without compultion. The big problem is, so much of what training is requires the dog not to succum to it's natural instincts. The motivational methods for these obstacles is to "REMOVE" all such obstacles and just say it isn't important to me. Give me a break, it isn't important because it can't be done withpout some compultion......just as the dogs are not really trained at all if you are not standing there with a reward. 

Another example. Hunting dogs running trash animals without the hunter present. You can't break them with motivation and no one has ever been able to. Motivational training is fine for teaching a task, or for reinforcing an instinct....but you will never break natural instincts using it......and in todays world that is a must.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

maggie fraser said:


> This has been the very inconsistency for me here too..
> 
> I have been interpreting Lynda's claim as it being possible to train with motivational methods (in exclusion to physical corrections), as being possible with dogs of different breeds across the disciplines. Obviously not 100% because that is an impossible claim to make for any reasonable person... the reasons why have been stated on this thread.
> 
> Is everyone agreed on that ?
> 
> Lynda???
> 
> This thread is doing my head in!


I interpreted from it that it could be done with any breed across the line regardless of drive, hardness...whatever, without any form or shape of correction...thats what she stated after all



Kat LaPlante said:


> Has anyone on the forum successfully trained and titled a working dog using only motivational means and never even an ounce of cumpulsion? Is this even possible?





Lynda Myers said:


> Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
> of course a good understanding of the method is a must.


----------



## tracey schneider

Kadi Thingvall said:


> IMO this one statement negates the entire "I train positively only" claim. If you use corrections at home, then you don't "train without compulsion", you "train without compulsion some of the time, and use compulsion other times". Which is actually how many of us train. But also, since you use corrections at home, when you are training "without compulsion" you are using the effects of the compulsion at home in your training. You said in a previous post that you just use body language/threat for a correction, and that's all you need. That body language carries the threat it carries in part because of the compulsion you use at home. The dog knows there might be something more to it then just the threat. If there was never any backing up of the threat, the dog would eventually learn to call your bluff, unless they were really really sensitive.


+1


----------



## Alice Bezemer

tracey delin said:


> +1


just of topic for a second but Tracey i love your avatar...that dog has a real "bite me" look on him...ya gotta love it


----------



## tracey schneider

Im exhausted with this topic too.... been too many of them:-&



> Now going off other conversations on here I've gathered you've never trained a dog all the way through without the use of physical corrections for proofing.


Nope in fact I will set a dog up to fail so I can crank crank crank zap zap zap \\/ lmao. Seriously, I have to say, I am much quicker nowadays to correct, but with Icon that was not the case. What do you consider all the way through? A BH?? A BH is your level tested with your method right? Im pretty close to being positive that I did that with Icon, about 90% sure.



> Really...I've watched the videos of Blanco it's apparent he's a fun dog for sure to work. But is it really as black and white as you say? Blanco looked confused in the blind search and when he looked back at you in confusion you rewarded him with a stim/shock.


He is VERY FUN, but don’t be confused by his stoic nature that was no reward and if I know my trainer (who had the remote) it wasn’t a stim either.



> It didn't look very black and white to me. Were you correcting for looking back or for not running the blind? Seems to me he didn't know the behavior as well as you thought.


No he didn’t know it, we were teaching it. Did you read the description of the video? Remember I said, I use any and all types of methods. :wink:



> I personally would have gone back a step in training. To correct before the dog knows the behavior is unfair in my opinion.


OK, I can understand that…. I could have even guessed that lol



> Ok if he known the behavior then why didn't he carry it out? How do "you" determine when the dog knows the behavior? What is your measuring stick?


See above…….



> I have witness far more stress, conflict and damage produced by those using a more hands on approach. Quite a few who are certified Master Dog Trainers!!!! So please don't try to make correction based training all warm and fuzzy because it is not. Very few people can use in a manner that doesn't produce stress.


I understand people can screw up dogs with physical corrections, Ive seen a ton of mess as well. I never said otherwise, I said…. if you are doing them fairly there shouldn’t be the issues…. 



> Are "you" truly able to read your dog to the extent of those that can use motivational methods. Again I ask you were you correcting the dog for looking back or for not searching the blind? Because he did look confused when he looked back. And how did he know which behavior he it was being corrected for?


Actually Im not the one holding the remote ;-). Yes of course I can see he is confused …. Lol, Both are wrong, both get corrected. Don’t look at me, don’t spin, don’t hesitate, and def. don’t blow me off, do it right and you get the reward. Actually it was black and white, you don’t do it correctly, you get zapped you do it right you get a bite…. He still loves me…. I think you can see that in the video. He is not damaged, our relationship is as good as ever, he didn’t get his feeling hurt, and it was clear enough to him as the next session we were running the two blinds from "almost" mid field… almost. :-$

I don’t consider a dog that climbs the leash to be hard, and I wont tolerate it either….. so Im not really sure what that whole paragraph was about? How does the helper show you how handler soft/ sensitive the dogs is? 

actually you can answer if you want, but I think Im done with this thread.... I havent really heard anything new here...train the way you want, as will I and just about everyone else  Its all good..... just have fun and much success with your dogs O

t


----------



## Konnie Hein

Lynda Myers said:


> I personally would bash a dog's head in for this. At no time is it ever ok to bite me or act like your going too.


Bashing a dog's head in. Wow - that comment from a person who thinks using corrections in sport dog training is too stressful for the dog. 

I think I hear a toilet flushing.


----------



## tracey schneider

Alice Bezemer said:


> just of topic for a second but Tracey i love your avatar...that dog has a real "bite me" look on him...ya gotta love it


Thank you Alice....... Im feelin about the same right now O:lol:

t


----------



## Konnie Hein

Lynda Myers said:


> So please don't try to make correction based training all warm and fuzzy because it is not. Very few people can use in a manner that doesn't produce stress.


Interesting reading if anybody wants to learn more about stress responses in dogs (in particular, Malinois) trained with different methods:
Comparison of Stress and Learning Effects of Three Different Training Methods in Dogs
http://www.ecma.eu.com/Comparison o... three different training methods in dogs.pdf

From the article:
"Values [of saliva cortisol] when using the quitting signal were higher than values when using the ecollar or the pinch collar."

"Frustration is a high stressor for Malinois."

"In this study the e-collar induced the highest learning effect and least stress."

Certainly it's only one study, but it's food for thought.


----------



## Jim Nash

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Hi Jim:
> 
> And thanks for the explanation above. I'm always interested in some of the law enforcement aspects and how it transfers to reliability on the street. I know you can work it through with the extreme even though it can be a PITA. But is that type of dog the desired. Although you play the hand you're dealt, I wouldn't WANT the borderline. Somewhere along the spectrum is the ideal that gives you both I would think. I think you also operate under a time contstaint in getting the dog through the program??? Lynda and Bob have seen the type of dog you described worked through this. I came along afterwards and watched the process with another dog. I think thats why she talks in terms of absolute. I agree the use of the absolute have made people just plant their feet and put all their energy and thought into rejecting it outright or just focusing on refuting it in. Its really just turned into Lynda said, Lynda said, Lynda said.
> 
> Ohhhhhh and I do like the creativity of the tree.
> 
> 
> Terrasita


Setting a good foundation in the fundamentals makes it easier when moving onto training for reliabilty in the streets and if that's done right we can get reliabilty on the streets . It's the same training principles for PSD work as anyone else . 

For these 2 I descibed are they desireable ? Yes , if you like very strong dogs doing the final job well . It sucks having to put in so much work but the end product is great and you can't help but love strong dogs. But as a trainer JMO , having a full class of these types would be exhausting and quite frankly most new handlers and average handlers couldn't train and/or maintain a dog like that . 

We most definately aren't going to pass on a dog with an extreme out problem if that dog shows he can do the rest of what a PSD is used for and that's being good at searching and locating (it's primary job) . We can get the behavior(outing) it will just be tougher then most . It would be foolish to pass on a K9 that has the qualities to search , locate and confront a human being just because it has an extreme out problem . As for the borderline dog everyone has a criteria for what is exceptable and what's not , all dogs are not the same and do the job at different levels . I guess I'm just not internet savy enough or have a good enough vocabulary to make it sound more dramatic thus the borderline dog stronger . 

As for Bob and Lynda having seen the same type of dogs as the 2 I described , neither you nor I know that for sure having only discussed this on the internet . All I can tell you is I've been doing this for 13 years . Trained on average 12- 30 K9s a year for other departments along with training the 21 PSD's in our unit, from green to a finished PSD . I have seen a wide variety of dogs , drives , issues , etc. because of that and not seen many others like these 2 . I have seen plenty that I could only describe over the internet as sounding similar (words can only describe so much) but not many like these 2 . Some even had the exact same behaviors on the out but weren't nearly as stubborn when it got down to it . I'd have to see those types of dogs being trained 100% to believe it . 

Lyda made a very strong statement by saying ALL dogs could be trained 100% positive , noone else so far has claimed that , and because of that is being called on it . I think it's telling that many disagree and noone else has agreed with her on this issue .


----------



## Jim Nash

I think I was having a little Private Pyle moment here . 

" I have seen a wide variety of dogs , drives , issues , etc. because of that and not seen many others like these 2 . I have seen plenty that I could only describe over the internet as sounding similar (words can only describe so much) but not many like these 2 . " 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lryr-3Ho2mQ&feature=related


----------



## Joby Becker

alice bezemer said:


> lol good one but slightly of base since "when e. F. Hutton talks, people listen"
> 
> and when "lynda myers talks, people question"
> 
> dont get answered tho but thats beside the point


i haven't heard e.f. Hutton say shyt in years...has anyone else?


----------



## Joby Becker

Don Turnipseed said:


> I love it. T just doesn't want to take the time to train her dogs to stay out of the garbage and eat food off the counters. Lynda says she uses com-pulsion to teach manners such as no countersurfing and not getting into the garbage. They keep referring to it as "manners". No one has picked up on this as of yet but it isn't that manners is the problem, it is that these are very natural things for a dog to do as they are opportunistic. The problem is not teaching a dog something that is not natural, but, so much of training dogs is to over ride the natural instincts. This is the catch 22 of the motivational world and why it's proponents don't teach manners. You cannot break natural instincts without compultion. The big problem is, so much of what training is requires the dog not to succum to it's natural instincts. The motivational methods for these obstacles is to "REMOVE" all such obstacles and just say it isn't important to me. Give me a break, it isn't important because it can't be done withpout some compultion......just as the dogs are not really trained at all if you are not standing there with a reward.
> 
> Another example. Hunting dogs running trash animals without the hunter present. You can't break them with motivation and no one has ever been able to. Motivational training is fine for teaching a task, or for reinforcing an instinct....but you will never break natural instincts using it......and in todays world that is a must.


DON, I agree. 100% good post


----------



## Jim Nash

Alice Bezemer said:


> LOL good one but slightly of base since "When E. F. Hutton talks, people listen"
> 
> and when "Lynda Myers talks, people question"
> 
> dont get answered tho but thats beside the point


All I remember is in every commercial people listened and E.F. Hutton didn't say anything .


----------



## Lynda Myers

Kadi Thingvall said:


> IMO this one statement negates the entire "I train positively only" claim. If you use corrections at home, then you don't "train without compulsion", you "train without compulsion some of the time, and use compulsion other times". Which is actually how many of us train. But also, since you use corrections at home, when you are training "without compulsion" you are using the effects of the compulsion at home in your training. You said in a previous post that you just use body language/threat for a correction, and that's all you need. That body language carries the threat it carries in part because of the compulsion you use at home. The dog knows there might be something more to it then just the threat. If there was never any backing up of the threat, the dog would eventually learn to call your bluff, unless they were really really sensitive.


No, because first off I don't use collars or leashes to make any corrections and once the ground rules have been set for house and yard it's never revisited. Furthermore I never use compulsion of any kind or the after effects when training behaviors that will later be used in trials. Regardless as to whether I'm training at home or on the field! And since you have never saw me interaction with my dogs in training or otherwise I would refer you to those who have Maren, Terrasita or even Bob. They will all tell you this is the case...no compulsion or threat of it. It's all fun and games so much that my prior club thought I didn't take it seriously enough. I don't care how others view it it gets me what I want and is in line with my personality...bouncy, bubbly and always smiling and laughing. 
As to the sensitivity thing trust me there is nothing sensitive about my male Rook...Mr. Oblivious and my pup Katara is proving to be similar in nature to him.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Don Turnipseed said:


> Another example. Hunting dogs running trash animals without the hunter present. You can't break them with motivation and no one has ever been able to. Motivational training is fine for teaching a task, or for reinforcing an instinct....but you will never break natural instincts using it......and in todays world that is a must.


On the other hand, you can't always break them with compulsion either, even "natural" compulsion. I don't ever argue that there is not consequences "in nature." But dogs that go after porcupines or skunks time and time again and who look like this haven't had their natural instincts broken. 











Or dogs who have gotten shot or kicked chasing cattle or horses and still have this drive to do so, and so on. Anyways, JMO why "purely positive" likely doesn't exist and while I try to use corrections as judiciously or as little as possible, I do use them on occasion.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> ....I would refer you to those who have Maren, Terrasita or even Bob....


All three of these people have decided not to back you on the "any dog" statement...just to let you know...Can you please answer this for me....How many dogs have you owned since you were an adult, what breeds, pedigrees? and what is the highest you have taken them to in a sport, and what sport?...Just want some background to help understand the validity of your claims about the ANY dog statement?


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Lynda Myers said:


> No, because first off I don't use collars or leashes to make any corrections and once the ground rules have been set for house and yard it's never revisited. Furthermore I never use compulsion of any kind or the after effects when training behaviors that will later be used in trials. Regardless as to whether I'm training at home or on the field! And since you have never saw me interaction with my dogs in training or otherwise I would refer you to those who have Maren, Terrasita or even Bob. They will all tell you this is the case...no compulsion or threat of it. It's all fun and games so much that my prior club thought I didn't take it seriously enough. I don't care how others view it it gets me what I want and is in line with my personality...bouncy, bubbly and always smiling and laughing.
> As to the sensitivity thing trust me there is nothing sensitive about my male Rook...Mr. Oblivious and my pup Katara is proving to be similar in nature to him.


We have another person on the forum who is always bouncy, bubbly and always smiling and laughing. Have you met JEFF yet?\\/


----------



## Lynda Myers

Alice Bezemer said:


> *remember tho that it goes both ways ! We apparantly dont understand you since we have never done it yet (according to your assumption) yet the same can be said about you in this case.....you can not state you understand our dogs or ways of training if you have never worked or trained with either...or with any of us for that matter
> 
> 
> *


Alice I'm not an ass but you might be. 
When did I ever say I had never ever trained with either a pinch or a e-collar?
Another question have you ever set your training tool box on the shelf and said I am going to train this particular dog using nothing more then marker/reward training. Reward to mean using something that the dog saw as a reward not what you deed as one?
I know you haven't because in a prior post you said you would never ever train that way. Even if it gave you the results you were looking for. So no you can't conceive what I mean.


----------



## Joby Becker

Joby Becker said:


> All three of these people have decided not to back you on the "any dog" statement...just to let you know...Can you please answer this for me....How many dogs have you owned since you were an adult, what breeds, pedigrees? and what is the highest you have taken them to in a sport, and what sport?...Just want some background to help understand the validity of your claims about the ANY dog statement?


I conceive it perfectly, and it can be done....

Just NOT WITH ANY DOG!

Have you ever owned a puppy that at 6 weeks you roll him on his back, he bloodies up your hand/arm to get off his back? Have you ever owned a 7 week old pup that will reluctantly abandon his possession to overtly attack you to defend it from you trying to take it from him, also bloodying you up? just curious..have you ever owned a dog that was NOT biddable at 6-7 weeks?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Maren Bell Jones said:


> On the other hand, you can't always break them with compulsion either, even "natural" compulsion. I don't ever argue that there is not consequences "in nature." But dogs that go after porcupines or skunks time and time again and who look like this haven't had their natural instincts broken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or dogs who have gotten shot or kicked chasing cattle or horses and still have this drive to do so, and so on. Anyways, JMO why "purely positive" likely doesn't exist and while I try to use corrections as judiciously or as little as possible, I do use them on occasion.


As Lynda would say, "Well, whoever trained them simply didn't do it right. You have to start when they are really young so you can get in their head and lay the foundation of them receiveing a reward for everything they do correctly. If it is unwanted natural behavior, screw it and just remove what caused it" LMAO

And yes, there are some trash runners that won't break. Most will. Still better than what you would get with motivational methods which is zip.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> All three of these people have decided not to back you on the "any dog" statement...just to let you know...Can you please answer this for me....How many dogs have you owned since you were an adult, what breeds, pedigrees? and what is the highest you have taken them to in a sport, and what sport?...Just want some background to help understand the validity of your claims about the ANY dog statement?


How many have you trained to say that it hasn't work?


----------



## Lynda Myers

Don Turnipseed said:


> As Lynda would say, "Well, whoever trained them simply didn't do it right. You have to start when they are really young so you can get in their head and lay the foundation of them receiveing a reward for everything they do correctly. If it is unwanted natural behavior, screw it and just remove what caused it" LMAO


By George Don I think you got it!!!


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> I conceive it perfectly, and it can be done....
> 
> Just NOT WITH ANY DOG!
> 
> Have you ever owned a puppy that at 6 weeks you roll him on his back, he bloodies up your hand/arm to get off his back? Have you ever owned a 7 week old pup that will reluctantly abandon his possession to overtly attack you to defend it from you trying to take it from him, also bloodying you up? just curious..have you ever owned a dog that was NOT biddable at 6-7 weeks?


Yes Joby and their a lot of fun to raise and train! Sorry you didn't enjoy yours.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> How many have you trained to say that it hasn't work?


None...your way..but have owned about 10 or so..
now HOW many have you owned?
Keep it up, and I might just have to sell you one  AND TRADE ONE TO JODY... for "research" purposes...


----------



## Konnie Hein

None of the +R only people want to tackle a rebuttal to the study I posted?
Here's the link again, since it is now a few pages back:
http://www.ecma.eu.com/Comparison o... three different training methods in dogs.pdf


----------



## Guest

Joby Becker said:


> None...your way..but have owned about 10 or so..
> now HOW many have you owned?
> Keep it up, and I might just have to sell you one  AND TRADE ONE TO JODY... for "research" purposes...


 
WTF? this thread keeps going and going.....LOL, research huh?!


----------



## Joby Becker

Jody Butler said:


> WTF? this thread keeps going and going.....LOL, research huh?!


If a trade is NOT possible..IM me...


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Konnie, the quickest way to get the job done is going to be the least stressful. Most dogs don't argue with a shock collar. Most leash corrections need to be repeated because the first wasn't hard enough. The methods are all less stressfull on the dog than endless hours of repetition. It should be black and white and that is what relieves stress.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> None...your way..but have owned about 10 or so..
> now HOW many have you owned?
> Keep it up, and I might just have to sell you one  AND TRADE ONE TO JODY... for "research" purposes...


2 Dobes, 4 GSDs, 10 Rotties, 12 Amer. Bulldogs and 6 Pitbulls of those 4 were trained using using marker based training. The rest used Koehler's way. trained in ob and pp stuff.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> 2 Dobes, 4 GSDs, 10 Rotties, 12 Amer. Bulldogs and 6 Pitbulls of those 4 were trained using using marker based training. The rest used Koehler's way. trained in ob and pp stuff.


I got you..

the question was how many? " puppies that at 6 weeks you roll him on his back, he bloodies up your hand/arm to get off his back? and 7 week old pups that will reluctantly abandon thier possession to overtly attack you to defend it from you trying to take it from him, also bloodying you up?

so you owned 34 dogs like this, got everyone beat on here I am sure, besides the police/mwd breeders...maybe even them LOL

I myself have NEVER run across dobies like this,pitbulls like this, or AB's like this...a few GSD, and 2 Rotties, in my life....ALL from STRONG working lines. And that is me actively scouring the country for them....and you found 34 mostly from AB's and APBT? I know of VERY few breeders that produce dogs like these OCCASIONALLY from those breeds..based on hearsay...but you found 18 of the hardest of hardcore bulldog types? and owned them?


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> 2 Dobes, 4 GSDs, 10 Rotties, 12 Amer. Bulldogs and 6 Pitbulls of those 4 were trained using using marker based training. The rest used Koehler's way. trained in ob and pp stuff.


do you own any of these super hardcore dogs currently? that anyone can verify?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Konnie Hein said:


> None of the +R only people want to tackle a rebuttal to the study I posted?
> Here's the link again, since it is now a few pages back:
> http://www.ecma.eu.com/Comparison o... three different training methods in dogs.pdf


Fairly limited study as they state. 1) Positive punishment vs. negative punishment [one form] and their use in stopping a behavior, not teaching one and measuring the result of each. One breed that they say easily frustrates and has a high state of arousal. Has nothing to do with teaching a desired behavior with positive reinforcement or with extinguishing an unwanted behavior by positively teaching incompatible or alternative behaviors. They admit at the end that its of limited value and they need more research. Okay. 


Terrasita


----------



## Lynda Myers

Tracey of course your right everyone should use whatever best suits them as long as it's CLEAR, FAIR, and BLACK and WHITE. The black and white, fair and clear being words you've repeated several times here. As have a few others...when employing correction base training.

So I ask you where is the fairness in all of this? Didn't you say if done correctly that there wouldn't be any confusion? Sorry but your words don't match your training actually there contradictory. As your training was neither fair or black and white. Because if it was Blanco wouldn't have been confused. Sure you could argue that he is hard enough to handle it. But is it really fair? You admittedly said he didn't know the behavior. So how can he do right if he doesn't know what right is? I know, I know you stim em til they get it right. Still is it fair to correct for something the dog hasn't learned yet? What happens when the collar comes off? Does he still know it? 


> No he didn’t know it, we were teaching it.
> 
> Yes of course I can see he is confused …. Lol, Both are wrong, both get corrected. Don’t look at me, don’t spin, don’t hesitate, and def. don’t blow me off, do it right and you get the reward.


Wow you find it funny that he was confused knowing what was to follow?  When you could have prevented it by showing him what right was. Surely you know the more things add under the blanket of one correction the more room there is for confusion. Again it wasn't black and white but a whole lot a gray.


> Actually it was black and white, you don’t do it correctly, you get zapped you do it right you get a bite….


Don't do WHAT correctly? Remember you haven't taught what right is!. So how can you in good conscience do this and thinks right and fair?
This kind of misuse of a tool builds resentment and frustration that will manifest in other places at some point. 



> He is VERY FUN, but don’t be confused by his stoic nature that was no reward and if I know my trainer (who had the remote) it wasn’t a stim either.


So your allowing someone else to fry your dog for something he doesn't know wow that's real nice. It really speaks about how his handler is learning more about what makes him tick doesn't it. More like how much shock can he take.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Don Turnipseed said:


> It should be black and white and that is what relieves stress.


We are in 100% agreement, Don.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> I got you..
> 
> the question was how many? " puppies that at 6 weeks you roll him on his back, he bloodies up your hand/arm to get off his back? and 7 week old pups that will reluctantly abandon thier possession to overtly attack you to defend it from you trying to take it from him, also bloodying you up?
> 
> so you owned 34 dogs like this, got everyone beat on here I am sure, besides the police/mwd breeders...maybe even them LOL
> 
> I myself have NEVER run across dobies like this,pitbulls like this, or AB's like this...a few GSD, and 2 Rotties, in my life....ALL from STRONG working lines. And that is me actively scouring the country for them....and you found 34 mostly from AB's and APBT? I know of VERY few breeders that produce dogs like these OCCASIONALLY from those breeds..based on hearsay...but you found 18 of the hardest of hardcore bulldog types? and owned them?


Joby do you not remember your own words?



> None...your way..but have owned about 10 or so..
> now HOW many have you owned?
> Keep it up, and I might just have to sell you one AND TRADE ONE TO JODY... for "research" purposes...


----------



## Mary Buck

Lynda Myers said:


> 2 Dobes, 4 GSDs, 10 Rotties, 12 Amer. Bulldogs and 6 Pitbulls of those 4 were trained using using marker based training. The rest used Koehler's way. trained in ob and pp stuff.


That many dogs and you have a total of 2 Bh's? Not great odds.

Wasn't there a thread where you mentioned training 4 dogs. It wasn't THAT long ago...even if you have been a very busy woman . 

I am a bit confused.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Mary Buck said:


> That many dogs and you have a total of 2 Bh's? Not great odds.
> 
> Wasn't there a thread where you mentioned training 4 dogs. It wasn't THAT long ago...even if you have been a very busy woman .
> 
> I am a bit confused.


But of course you are try to keep up. Do you have anything productive to add to this conversation or are you here to help tear it down.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Well, I like to torture as much as the next person, but no one asked if she was trying to compete with the other dogs.

I always enjoy poking fun at this and that, but would love to be proven completely wrong about positive methods working past the lower levels, ad with a stronger than average dog.

However, maybe there are "X" amount of exercises that can be trained positive, and "X" that cannot. And even then, some of those can be started with positive.

I tried, and failed with positive, some of it was me, some of it was just reality. I am positive that my dog would have done better if I started correcting him a lot earlier instead of struggling with him trying to get him to do things correctly with positive.

I also wonder how much better it would have gone with regular work with an experienced decoy. I still do not think it would have been all positive, but a lot less corrections than what is happening currently.

Many times I go out and correct him one time during an entire session. Sometimes it is a shock fest. I have yet to see a pattern in why it is this way, some days he just says **** it I guess.


----------



## Julie Ann Alvarez

I think this thread is RETARDED....

You all can't stop nit picking at each other..... WTF? Who cares if Linda takes 5 years to Motivationally train her dog to walk backwards while rubbing his belly like a budda and singing the Star Spangle Banner? (great job Linda).

Who cares if Joby wins High in trial on his first Schutzhund trial with forced retrieves????? (I would be happy for you BTW).

The point is people do what they want. Linda and her MOTIVATIONAL friends will train every dog they want their way and we all will train our way. Most of us wont want to go through the trouble to do what they are doing since it seems like a slow process and some of us disagree with some of the concepts but for the time being this is a free country and we are free to use pinch collars, e-collars, long lines, tabs, clickers, treats, tugs, balls, any manner of imaginable drive building toys to get the job done.

Enough.... I can't keep up any more. 

Peace?

Julie


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> Alice I'm not an ass but you might be.
> When did I ever say I had never ever trained with either a pinch or a e-collar?
> Another question have you ever set your training tool box on the shelf and said I am going to train this particular dog using nothing more then marker/reward training. Reward to mean using something that the dog saw as a reward not what you deed as one?
> I know you haven't because in a prior post you said you would never ever train that way. Even if it gave you the results you were looking for. So no you can't conceive what I mean.



Thats just to funny....if you are going to use my statement do it correctly...i said if i had to train like that i wouldnt want to train anymore...meaning if i was forced to use your way ONLY...Never did i say i dont train that way...funny enough 90% of my training works exactly that way...its the 10% that raises questions here...and yes ive set my toolbox aside many a time hun...and ive grabed it in use as well...your point here would be ? that i use tools ? let me tell you something...atleast my statements havent changed about what i do and how...ive seen yours bounce all over the place tho just like you...

training your way ? no negative but possitive ? strictly reward...things you hammer on constantly...let me see...what did you say ?



> Originally Posted by *Lynda Myers*
> _Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
> of course a good understanding of the method is a must._


_




LOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOL this might be if I didn't use physical corrections for manners. 

Click to expand...






I personally would bash a dog's head in for this.

Click to expand...


_Now call me an ass...and yes i have a fine one at that but thats beside the point....your statements make me wonder if you use your theory in the same manner as you respond to posts made on this topic...ignoring things posed to you and bouncing all over the place...i can see how that would be "stressfree" for a dog!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Lee H Sternberg said:


> We have another person on the forum who is always bouncy, bubbly and always smiling and laughing. Have you met JEFF yet?\\/


That is priceless, Lee \\/


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> But of course you are try to keep up. Do you have anything productive to add to this conversation or are you here to help tear it down.



Atta girl...dont like what they say then try and steamrole right over them...in order to avoid having answer yet another question...you are making your point more clear with every post...just dont think its the point you would want to make #-o


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Come on, lighten up, the answers are here:

Pavlov: We fed the chicken on the opposite side of the road each day at 4 p.m. until the
chicken's autonomic system actually began causing the chicken to cross the road 
at 4 p.m. without even questioning the why.

B.F. Skinner: On prior occasions when the chicken voluntarily crossed the road, this behaviour was followed immediately by a reinforcing consequence.

Cesar Milan: I bullied, chased, poked, and intimidated the chicken until it raced across the road because I am a strong leader…

Barbara Woodhouse: You just say, Walkies with the right accent and place a crumpet on the other side of the road…

Karen Pryor: By associating R+ with road crossing and P+ with standing still, with a VR schedule, and offering a reward in keeping with the Premack principle, we increased the intensity and frequency of the road crossing behaviour.

Bill Koehler: A few well-timed pops on the choke chain and the chicken was happy to cross the road.

Nicholas Dodman: I gave the chicken fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine, carbamazepine, and azapirone and then it was happy to cross the road.

Patti Ruzzo: I crossed the road, pausing every step to spit a treat out of my mouth like a human pez dispenser and the chicken followed along catching the treats.

Victoria Stilwell: So what if the chicken crossed the road, who cares where the chicken went ... the bigger issue is do these pants make me bumm look fat?

Connie Cleveland: Because chickens are problem solvers

Diane Bauman We put turtles on the road and made sure the chicken was well proofed in crossing it between the turtles LOL

Susan Garrett: I taught the chicken a motivational tug and it happily danced across the road

Blanche Saunders Forward ! Say heel and jerk the leash ! If the chicken lags, jerk forward, if
the chicken gets distracted use a series of short snappy jerks. When you get to the other side cuff him before he sits and if the chicken sits crooked cuff it again

Electric Collar Advocate: Whenever the chicken does not cross the road I give it an electric shock. But do not worry, the shock is no more than you would feel if you walked on a carpet wearing socks and it does not bother the chicken at all. The feathers standing up and the smell of burning flesh mean nothing, in fact, they are happier having nice clear communication than they would be otherwise.

Purely Positive trainer: Chickens are just like little people in feather >jackets, and if you
love them and give them diamonds and feel sorry for them all the time, they will be happy to cross the road for you.

Paris Hilton: Because I put it in a Gucci bag and carried it.

Shelter director: Any chickens that do not cross the road will be euthanized for their own 
good, and the others we will adopt out tomorrow for only $200 each. Please send us money so we can keep doing more of this important work!

HSUS member: I do not know anything about animals, I have never been around animals and am not really fond of animals, but we passed a law mandating that chickens be kept without cages because animals belong only in the wild and cannot be happy coexisting 
with man, so now they are walking wherever they want.

PETA member: Chickens have the right to live in a world without roads. Any chicken that lives within a hundred miles of a road is suffering an inhumane existence and might 
eventually be hit by a car so we should kill it today to ensure that it does not die 
tomorrow.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Alice Bezemer said:


> Thats just to funny....if you are going to use my statement do it correctly...i said if i had to train like that i wouldnt want to train anymore...meaning if i was forced to use your way ONLY...Never did i say i dont train that way...funny enough 90% of my training works exactly that way...its the 10% that raises questions here...and yes ive set my toolbox aside many a time hun...and ive grabed it in use as well...your point here would be ? that i use tools ? let me tell you something...atleast my statements havent changed about what i do and how...ive seen yours bounce all over the place tho just like you...
> 
> training your way ? no negative but possitive ? strictly reward...things you hammer on constantly...let me see...what did you say ?
> 
> 
> Now call me an ass...and yes i have a fine one at that but thats beside the point....your statements make me wonder if you use your theory in the same manner as you respond to posts made on this topic...ignoring things posed to you and bouncing all over the place...i can see how that would be "stressfree" for a dog!


Blah blah blah blah blah blah..:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen: 
What questions have I not answered?
Where have my statements changed or bounced around? If you had been around for the last couple discussions in prior months you would have been aware of this well know fact. 
Do try to stay on point...
have you ever set aside the tool box and train even one dog without it? I'm not talking about training up to the point you hit a snag then reaching for your collars. No I mean going all the way, working through each behavior until you have a good routine or are trial ready using the method mentioned at the beginning of the thread only. 

Simply amazing...
You who uses multi-methods can't seem to understand how I can differentiate between manners and competition and train accordingly. Is it really that hard for you to grasp? 
Awww I'm sorry.:-({|= Maybe your not as versatile as you think.:-k
And ya'll wanna deed me the one trick pony.



> Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him. Of course a good understanding of the method is a must.



What exactly is your issue with the above? 

To think this is all over the use of the small three letter word "ANY". LOLLOL  Wow that word really got to ya'lls goat didn't it.:grin::grin::grin:
And the fact that someone would even dare to believe it can be done oh the crime of it all. 
Well ya know what they say defeat first starts in the mind, believe it can't be done and it can't. So no for you it won't work. Where as for me I believe all things are possible for those who believe. Remember this though I can continue with this until Jesus comes back.
Because for me it's all fun and games! And I love to watching and/or hearing people spitting wooden nickels. \\/
So carry on.:smile:


----------



## Lynda Myers

Gillian Schuler said:


> Come on, lighten up, the answers are here:
> 
> Pavlov: We fed the chicken on the opposite side of the road each day at 4 p.m. until the
> chicken's autonomic system actually began causing the chicken to cross the road
> at 4 p.m. without even questioning the why.
> 
> B.F. Skinner: On prior occasions when the chicken voluntarily crossed the road, this behaviour was followed immediately by a reinforcing consequence.
> 
> Cesar Milan: I bullied, chased, poked, and intimidated the chicken until it raced across the road because I am a strong leader…
> 
> Barbara Woodhouse: You just say, Walkies with the right accent and place a crumpet on the other side of the road…
> 
> Karen Pryor: By associating R+ with road crossing and P+ with standing still, with a VR schedule, and offering a reward in keeping with the Premack principle, we increased the intensity and frequency of the road crossing behaviour.
> 
> Bill Koehler: A few well-timed pops on the choke chain and the chicken was happy to cross the road.
> 
> Nicholas Dodman: I gave the chicken fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine, carbamazepine, and azapirone and then it was happy to cross the road.
> 
> Patti Ruzzo: I crossed the road, pausing every step to spit a treat out of my mouth like a human pez dispenser and the chicken followed along catching the treats.
> 
> Victoria Stilwell: So what if the chicken crossed the road, who cares where the chicken went ... the bigger issue is do these pants make me bumm look fat?
> 
> Connie Cleveland: Because chickens are problem solvers
> 
> Diane Bauman We put turtles on the road and made sure the chicken was well proofed in crossing it between the turtles LOL
> 
> Susan Garrett: I taught the chicken a motivational tug and it happily danced across the road
> 
> Blanche Saunders Forward ! Say heel and jerk the leash ! If the chicken lags, jerk forward, if
> the chicken gets distracted use a series of short snappy jerks. When you get to the other side cuff him before he sits and if the chicken sits crooked cuff it again
> 
> Electric Collar Advocate: Whenever the chicken does not cross the road I give it an electric shock. But do not worry, the shock is no more than you would feel if you walked on a carpet wearing socks and it does not bother the chicken at all. The feathers standing up and the smell of burning flesh mean nothing, in fact, they are happier having nice clear communication than they would be otherwise.
> 
> Purely Positive trainer: Chickens are just like little people in feather >jackets, and if you
> love them and give them diamonds and feel sorry for them all the time, they will be happy to cross the road for you.
> 
> Paris Hilton: Because I put it in a Gucci bag and carried it.
> 
> Shelter director: Any chickens that do not cross the road will be euthanized for their own
> good, and the others we will adopt out tomorrow for only $200 each. Please send us money so we can keep doing more of this important work!
> 
> HSUS member: I do not know anything about animals, I have never been around animals and am not really fond of animals, but we passed a law mandating that chickens be kept without cages because animals belong only in the wild and cannot be happy coexisting
> with man, so now they are walking wherever they want.
> 
> PETA member: Chickens have the right to live in a world without roads. Any chicken that lives within a hundred miles of a road is suffering an inhumane existence and might
> eventually be hit by a car so we should kill it today to ensure that it does not die
> tomorrow.



Now that's funny! Good one.


----------



## Scott Williams

Was the original question answered? Has anybody titled a dog in a protection sport without positive punishment? A simple yes or no would be great! If yes, who, what, where and when? Thanks.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Scott Williams said:


> Was the original question answered? Has anybody titled a dog in a protection sport without positive punishment? A simple yes or no would be great! If yes, who, what, where and when? Thanks.


no and NO 
Are we done now?


----------



## Joby Becker

conversation got crossed lynda..I missed a post. my apologies...I thought you were saying you owned all those dogs that were like the pups I described...not just the number of dogs you've owned.

My answer was that I have owned 10 or so dogs that *were* like that, but never used your methods...with them...

I had fun with them, that is for sure.

So out of the 34 dogs you've owned how many were of that extreme nature? and were those ones you trained in bitework with NO corrections? own any of these extreme dogs currently?


----------



## Mary Buck

Alice Bezemer said:


> Atta girl...dont like what they say then try and steamrole right over them...in order to avoid having answer yet another question...you are making your point more clear with every post...just dont think its the point you would want to make #-o


Yup been round this barn before and never got answers either...just lots of huffin and puffin.


----------



## Jim Nash

Lynda Myers said:


> Blah blah blah blah blah blah..:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:
> What questions have I not answered?
> Where have my statements changed or bounced around? If you had been around for the last couple discussions in prior months you would have been aware of this well know fact.
> Do try to stay on point...
> have you ever set aside the tool box and train even one dog without it? I'm not talking about training up to the point you hit a snag then reaching for your collars. No I mean going all the way, working through each behavior until you have a good routine or are trial ready using the method mentioned at the beginning of the thread only.
> 
> Simply amazing...
> You who uses multi-methods can't seem to understand how I can differentiate between manners and competition and train accordingly. Is it really that hard for you to grasp?
> Awww I'm sorry.:-({|= Maybe your not as versatile as you think.:-k
> And ya'll wanna deed me the one trick pony.
> 
> 
> 
> What exactly is your issue with the above?
> 
> To think this is all over the use of the small three letter word "ANY". LOLLOL  Wow that word really got to ya'lls goat didn't it.:grin::grin::grin:
> And the fact that someone would even dare to believe it can be done oh the crime of it all.
> Well ya know what they say defeat first starts in the mind, believe it can't be done and it can't. So no for you it won't work. Where as for me I believe all things are possible for those who believe. Remember this though I can continue with this until Jesus comes back.
> Because for me it's all fun and games! And I love to watching and/or hearing people spitting wooden nickels. \\/
> So carry on.:smile:



One thing you have convinced me is that you can go on and on about this . Good thing is the more you've gone on and on the more you've convinced me you're full of it . Your posts have become amusing seeing that amazingly positive person you claim to be , in training and in life desolve before our very eyes . All that hotair is very informative even though it's not what you're trying to convey. 

A positive did come out of you calling Alice an ass though . But once again it wasn't you who was responsible for that .


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Lynda Myers said:


> Blah blah blah blah blah blah..:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:
> What questions have I not answered?
> Where have my statements changed or bounced around? If you had been around for the last couple discussions in prior months you would have been aware of this well know fact.
> Do try to stay on point...
> 
> *Oh honey...the forum isnt big enough to even go into that...all them unanswered questions would fill up a pretty part im sure...and thats this topic alone...
> 
> * have you ever set aside the tool box and train even one dog without it? I'm not talking about training up to the point you hit a snag then reaching for your collars. No I mean going all the way, working through each behavior until you have a good routine or are trial ready using the method mentioned at the beginning of the thread only.
> 
> *What is it with you and Ecollars and Prongs to start with ? and why are you constantly suggesting thats what i use ? Hell talk about a Hardon for assumption...
> 
> If you as well had checked the forum for other topics you might have noticed i hardly ever use them to start with...and let me be honest while we are at it....your routine ? from start to finish ? honey ive seen the great results that you get...ive watched the vid and frankly im not impressed with what i was seeing...nice dog to see and i enjoyed watching him do his thing...tis no fault of the dog in my eyes...fill in the blanks...dog just did what he was learned....
> 
> 
> * Simply amazing...
> You who uses multi-methods can't seem to understand how I can differentiate between manners and competition and train accordingly. Is it really that hard for you to grasp?
> Awww I'm sorry.:-({|= Maybe your not as versatile as you think.:-k
> And ya'll wanna deed me the one trick pony.
> 
> *Im versatile when i need to be...I just dont claim the one size fit all attitude when it comes to dogs...and i surely wont claim that my way works for every dog regardless of drive, breed or mentality...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What exactly is your issue with the above?
> 
> To think this is all over the use of the small three letter word "ANY". LOLLOL  Wow that word really got to ya'lls goat didn't it.:grin::grin::grin:
> And the fact that someone would even dare to believe it can be done oh the crime of it all.
> Well ya know what they say defeat first starts in the mind, believe it can't be done and it can't. So no for you it won't work. Where as for me I believe all things are possible for those who believe. Remember this though I can continue with this until Jesus comes back.
> Because for me it's all fun and games! And I love to watching and/or hearing people spitting wooden nickels. \\/
> So carry on.
> 
> *Yup defeat starts in the mind...thats the one singular point i will agree on with you....i never believed it couldnt be dont...i believe its not going to work for all dogs and thats the difference between us...but you go right ahead and keep it up untill "you know who" comes back and ill just go back to doing my thing with my dogs...toolbox and all *


----------



## tracey schneider

Good Lord, I cant believe Im writing again on this thread lol. I honestly cant take it seriously anymore…. ](*,)

It was fair, it was black and white. Good/right = mark/reward, wrong/bad = mark/correct. Black and white. Confusion in teaching something…. I cant even comment lol

Your definition of fair and confusing is not MY definition of fair and confusing. Unfair and confusing to me is when you’re (Lynda) loading the clicker and the puppy bites your hand trying to get its reward and you correct it. So we will have to disagree on that….

I didnt find it funny that he was confused…lol. I found it funny that you asked. We are teaching what right is…….. just because it isnt YOUR way, doesn’t mean he isnt learning…if he wasn’t learning and we just kept doing the same thing over and over then… yes… not fair…... BUT he is. He was given a correction suitable to HIM w/o conflict with myself the handler. Please don’t talk about Blanco and how he will have resentment and frustration over the “misuse” of an ecollar when you have never met the dog. [-(

Yes Im allowing the decoy working my dog, who knows more than me, who has way more experience than me, to correct my dog that he is working. Instead of acting like I know more by trying to tell him how he is doing it wrong when I have done very little in my life in comparison…….. 

t


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda

Are the positions and heeling "correct" in this video, has the dog LEARNED the correct positions, or he does not know yet? I am asking because I have not trialed or got a BH yet...still learning....and want to learn more positive methods...how are you working on changing this?
I thought SCH was gonna be damn near impossible for me, with all the precision... but If I can pass with this type of crabbing, I am not nearly as worried. I enjoyed watching the happiness and attentiveness of the dog, looks like the training has paid off, for that aspect..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GXdNNB8iMA


----------



## Konnie Hein

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I always enjoy poking fun at this and that, but would love to be proven completely wrong about positive methods working past the lower levels, ad with a stronger than average dog.


Remember when Jennifer what's-her-name spoke up a while back and said she was going to train her dog (a DS) for sport using all +R? She seemed to me to be a person who would give it a good whirl. He sounded like a decent dog, and she mentioned that she was gonna write a blog to document her progress, etc. etc.

Then she ran off with the forum admin, got married, sold the dog, and now is more into horses than training dogs for sport protection, never to be heard from on here again. I'm kinda bummed about that, because I really wanted to see how far she could take it. Oh well.


----------



## Eric Read

Animals learn from 4 quadrants for a reason. It's how they learn to deal with life. I'm sure you can train using as singular of a quad as you want to, but I don't think it will give you the best product.

I chose mostly +R and less physical +P because I just want to. It makes me be more in control of ME and it makes training more fun for me. It's why I do it in the first place.

I think to achieve the best in each dog you have to have balance and that doesn't always mean 50/50. I think that balance is different for every dog and every handler and different in different situations with the same damn dog, how's that for confusing?

That's about all I have to say on the subject, I don't have to prove to anybody else i'm right, because I already know I am.

but really, does the way I train really affect any of you guys?


----------



## Julie Ann Alvarez

Eric Read said:


> .....
> 
> That's about all I have to say on the subject, I don't have to prove to anybody else i'm right, because I already know I am.
> but really, does the way I train really affect any of you guys?


Eric you rock =D>

Based on the 46 pages of posts I can safely think that some people on this forum have a few screws loose. Yes there are a few people on here that I might have given respect to- not true any longer. Now I know for certain that these people are absolutely NUTZ! 

Time for me to crawl back under my rock ](*,)


----------



## Lynda Myers

Scott Williams said:


> Was the original question answered? Has anybody titled a dog in a protection sport without positive punishment? A simple yes or no would be great! If yes, who, what, where and when? Thanks.


Yes Scott there has been. however because they are no names in the professional doggie sport world it's of no account. Go back and read the thread. You will also find that there is a schutzhund club here in St. Louis that uses this method of training for both OB and bitework and have been success it.on 
The reason the thread has gone on so long is my use of the little word "any" and it has most everyone's panties in a bunch giving a wedgy affect and it's quite irritating for them.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> Lynda
> 
> Are the positions and heeling "correct" in this video, has the dog LEARNED the correct positions, or he does not know yet? I am asking because I have not trialed or got a BH yet...still learning....and want to learn more positive methods...how are you working on changing this?
> I thought SCH was gonna be damn near impossible for me, with all the precision... but If I can pass with this type of crabbing, I am not nearly as worried. I enjoyed watching the happiness and attentiveness of the dog, looks like the training has paid off, for that aspect..
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GXdNNB8iMA


Rook was the first dog I trained this way and if you would turn up the volume you would have heard not only the judge's critique but the spectators commends on our performance.
The day these were taken was very hot about 90-95 degrees with high humidity.
You tell me if it's fixed?

























G]


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: The day these were taken was very hot about 90-95 degrees with high humidity.

I thought you lived were it was warm. Temp is not really a consideration when they live in it.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Lynda Myers said:


> Rook was the first dog I trained this way and if you would turn up the volume you would have heard not only the judge's critique but the spectators commends on our performance.
> The day these were taken was very hot about 90-95 degrees with high humidity.
> You tell me if it's fixed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G]


Where is my treat mom??? Where is my treat????


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Was that Linda Kurz as trial secretary/judge's assistant?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Eric Read said:


> Animals learn from 4 quadrants for a reason. It's how they learn to deal with life. I'm sure you can train using as singular of a quad as you want to, but I don't think it will give you the best product.
> 
> I chose mostly +R and less physical +P because I just want to. It makes me be more in control of ME and it makes training more fun for me. It's why I do it in the first place.
> 
> I think to achieve the best in each dog you have to have balance and that doesn't always mean 50/50. I think that balance is different for every dog and every handler and different in different situations with the same damn dog, how's that for confusing?
> 
> That's about all I have to say on the subject, I don't have to prove to anybody else i'm right, because I already know I am.
> 
> but really, does the way I train really affect any of you guys?


Eric, of possible, could you briefly explain the four quadrants?


----------



## Eric Read

positive reinforcement- you want the dog to sit, it sits, you give it a treat

Negative reinforcement- something unpleasant is removed to increase a behavior like a dog walks touching your leg because away from it, it gets stim'd till it touches again

positive punishment- dog bites handler, dog gets big prong collar correction. Punishment immediate to an action you want to stop

Negative punishment- a reward is taken away. If a dog has lost it's mind, won't think and is dirty in the blind, you might just go in pick him up and take him back to his crate for a while, or make him down outside the blind and take away all his fun for a while

that's pretty much it, and there is a bit of "gray" area in some of those definitions that can be debated, but the principles are pretty much the same.


----------



## maggie fraser

Another version Don.... it is of course a scientific theory..

 *a b o u t* *Operant Conditioning* is the term used by B.F. Skinner to describe the effects of the consequences of a particular behavior on the future occurrence of that behavior. There are four types of Operant Conditioning: *Positive Reinforcement*, *Negative Reinforcement*, *Punishment*, and *Extinction*. Both Positive and Negative Reinforcement strengthen behavior while both Punishment and Extinction weaken behavior. *e.g.* In *Positive Reinforcement* a particular behavior is strengthened by the consequence of experiencing a positive condition. For example:
[SIZE=-1]A hungry rat presses a bar in its cage and receives food. The food is a positive condition for the hungry rat. The rat presses the bar again, and again receives food. The rat's behavior of pressing the bar is strengthened by the consequence of receiving food.[/SIZE]​In *Negative Reinforcement* a particular behavior is strengthened by the consequence of stopping or avoiding a negative condition. For example:
[SIZE=-1]A rat is placed in a cage and immediately receives a mild electrical shock on its feet. The shock is a negative condition for the rat. The rat presses a bar and the shock stops. The rat receives another shock, presses the bar again, and again the shock stops. The rat's behavior of pressing the bar is strengthened by the consequence of stopping the shock.[/SIZE]​In *Punishment* a particular behavior is weakened by the consequence of experiencing a negative condition. For example:
[SIZE=-1]A rat presses a bar in its cage and receives a mild electrical shock on its feet. The shock is a negative condition for the rat. The rat presses the bar again and again receives a shock. The rat's behavior of pressing the bar is weakened by the consequence of receiving a shock.[/SIZE]​In *Extinction* a particular behavior is weakened by the consequence of not experiencing a positive condition or stopping a negative condition. For example:
[SIZE=-1]A rat presses a bar in its cage and nothing happens. Neither a positive or a negative condition exists for the rat. The rat presses the bar again and again nothing happens. The rat's behavior of pressing the bar is weakened by the consequence of not experiencing anything positive or stopping anything negative.[/SIZE]​


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Eric Read said:


> positive reinforcement- you want the dog to sit, it sits, you give it a treat
> 
> Negative reinforcement- something unpleasant is removed to increase a behavior like a dog walks touching your leg because away from it, it gets stim'd till it touches again
> 
> positive punishment- dog bites handler, dog gets big prong collar correction. Punishment immediate to an action you want to stop
> 
> Negative punishment- a reward is taken away. If a dog has lost it's mind, won't think and is dirty in the blind, you might just go in pick him up and take him back to his crate for a while, or make him down outside the blind and take away all his fun for a while
> 
> that's pretty much it, and there is a bit of "gray" area in some of those definitions that can be debated, but the principles are pretty much the same.


Thank you Eric. Makes sense. Basically what people have been doing since the dark ages to train dogs. Just depends on what is needed for a particular dog. I assume then that "all possy's" are classified as such because they have come to think they can get the job done just using the one quadrant?


----------



## Eric Read

Don Turnipseed said:


> Thank you Eric. Makes sense. Basically what people have been doing since the dark ages to train dogs.


Pretty much, but you see us "educated" folks like to put new fancy names on things and say , "see, look at what we discovered" 

But I guess I should clarify, I like to be even more simple, reward what I want, punish what I think needs punishing and try and be consistent. where my "reinforcement" or "punishment" falls in the 4 quads, I guess someone else can figure that out. I'm still working on my consistency.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: The day these were taken was very hot about 90-95 degrees with high humidity.
> 
> I thought you lived were it was warm. Temp is not really a consideration when they live in it.


 No. We have two and half seasons hot with a fair amount of rain, cold with snow and maybe a month of just right. The commend wasn't for the dog but for me. I don't do heat. If I had my rathers it would stay 65-70 degrees all year around.


----------



## Bob Scott

Gillian Schuler said:


> Come on, lighten up, the answers are here:
> 
> Pavlov: We fed the chicken on the opposite side of the road each day at 4 p.m. until the
> chicken's autonomic system actually began causing the chicken to cross the road
> at 4 p.m. without even questioning the why.
> 
> B.F. Skinner: On prior occasions when the chicken voluntarily crossed the road, this behaviour was followed immediately by a reinforcing consequence.
> 
> Cesar Milan: I bullied, chased, poked, and intimidated the chicken until it raced across the road because I am a strong leader…
> 
> Barbara Woodhouse: You just say, Walkies with the right accent and place a crumpet on the other side of the road…
> 
> Karen Pryor: By associating R+ with road crossing and P+ with standing still, with a VR schedule, and offering a reward in keeping with the Premack principle, we increased the intensity and frequency of the road crossing behaviour.
> 
> Bill Koehler: A few well-timed pops on the choke chain and the chicken was happy to cross the road.
> 
> Nicholas Dodman: I gave the chicken fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine, carbamazepine, and azapirone and then it was happy to cross the road.
> 
> Patti Ruzzo: I crossed the road, pausing every step to spit a treat out of my mouth like a human pez dispenser and the chicken followed along catching the treats.
> 
> Victoria Stilwell: So what if the chicken crossed the road, who cares where the chicken went ... the bigger issue is do these pants make me bumm look fat?
> 
> Connie Cleveland: Because chickens are problem solvers
> 
> Diane Bauman We put turtles on the road and made sure the chicken was well proofed in crossing it between the turtles LOL
> 
> Susan Garrett: I taught the chicken a motivational tug and it happily danced across the road
> 
> Blanche Saunders Forward ! Say heel and jerk the leash ! If the chicken lags, jerk forward, if
> the chicken gets distracted use a series of short snappy jerks. When you get to the other side cuff him before he sits and if the chicken sits crooked cuff it again
> 
> Electric Collar Advocate: Whenever the chicken does not cross the road I give it an electric shock. But do not worry, the shock is no more than you would feel if you walked on a carpet wearing socks and it does not bother the chicken at all. The feathers standing up and the smell of burning flesh mean nothing, in fact, they are happier having nice clear communication than they would be otherwise.
> 
> Purely Positive trainer: Chickens are just like little people in feather >jackets, and if you
> love them and give them diamonds and feel sorry for them all the time, they will be happy to cross the road for you.
> 
> Paris Hilton: Because I put it in a Gucci bag and carried it.
> 
> Shelter director: Any chickens that do not cross the road will be euthanized for their own
> good, and the others we will adopt out tomorrow for only $200 each. Please send us money so we can keep doing more of this important work!
> 
> HSUS member: I do not know anything about animals, I have never been around animals and am not really fond of animals, but we passed a law mandating that chickens be kept without cages because animals belong only in the wild and cannot be happy coexisting
> with man, so now they are walking wherever they want.
> 
> PETA member: Chickens have the right to live in a world without roads. Any chicken that lives within a hundred miles of a road is suffering an inhumane existence and might
> eventually be hit by a car so we should kill it today to ensure that it does not die
> tomorrow.


Gillian, I'm going to disagree with this!
IMO, Victoria Stiwell NEEDS a few more lbs on her bum!!!!
So THERE! ;-)


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Rook was the first dog I trained this way and if you would turn up the volume you would have heard not only the judge's critique but the spectators commends on our performance.
> The day these were taken was very hot about 90-95 degrees with high humidity.
> You tell me if it's fixed?


Maybe I used the wrong word as I am new to sport, crabbing is the dog walking at an angle (with his rear swung out), is that right?...

I looked, hard to tell from a few pics but 2 out of 3 look really suspect (pic 1 and 3) on the fix being completed.
You know for sure, so if it's fixed, it's fixed...

I'll wait for the SCH I,II, and III vids and the PSA title vids...to watch it on video...that will prove that it can be done by YOU to at least get to a III, let alone HIGH LEVEL, with 1 dog...

So rook is the first dog you trained this way? out of 34 dogs? and he is 1 out of 4 that you have trained this way? 

Do you still feel ANY dog can be trained to HIGH LEVEL with 100% positive after all of this? Even though everyone, has disagreed with this statement.

You are basing this statement on your personal experiences owning 4 dogs "trained" this way, with a BH (or 2) under your belt, out of 34 dogs you owned and trained for PP.

I think it was maybe a year and a half ago you did not know what "jam" meant in bitework...now you claim you can train ANY dog, regardless of drive or hardness 100% positive to HIGH LEVEL sport...you learn SUPER fast...


anyhow...I am just bored, had a few days off, it was entertaining...and informative...and you are right, it was the ANY dog that got my panties bunched...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> Maybe I used the wrong word as I am new to sport, crabbing is the dog walking at an angle (with his rear swung out), is that right?...
> 
> I looked, hard to tell from a few pics but 2 out of 3 look really suspect (pic 1 and 3) on the fix being completed.
> You know for sure, so if it's fixed, it's fixed...
> 
> I'll wait for the SCH I,II, and III vids and the PSA title vids...to watch it on video...that will prove that it can be done by YOU to at least get to a III, let alone HIGH LEVEL, with 1 dog...
> 
> So rook is the first dog you trained this way? out of 34 dogs? and he is 1 out of 4 that you have trained this way?
> 
> Do you still feel ANY dog can be trained to HIGH LEVEL with 100% positive after all of this? Even though everyone, has disagreed with this statement.
> 
> You are basing this statement on your personal experiences owning 4 dogs "trained" this way, with a BH (or 2) under your belt, out of 34 dogs you owned and trained for PP.
> 
> I think it was maybe a year and a half ago you did not know what "jam" meant in bitework...now you claim you can train ANY dog, regardless of drive or hardness 100% positive to HIGH LEVEL sport...you learn SUPER fast...
> 
> 
> anyhow...I am just bored, had a few days off, it was entertaining...and informative...and you are right, it was the ANY dog that got my panties bunched...


 
So are you done now or still bored and wanna keep rehashing all this over and over and over again. And BTW, the jam question came outta a conversation with me and I was wondering how folks would describe it.

Terrasita


----------



## Joby Becker

If it came from you, Lynda should have just explained it to ya..
yeah I'm done...

Now work on those titles...I'll be pretty stoked to see it...I will do the same..unless I give up...LOL


----------



## Lynda Myers

Joby Becker said:


> Maybe I used the wrong word as I am new to sport, crabbing is the dog walking at an angle (with his rear swung out), is that right?...
> 
> I looked, hard to tell from a few pics but 2 out of 3 look really suspect (pic 1 and 3) on the fix being completed.
> You know for sure, so if it's fixed, it's fixed...
> 
> I'll wait for the SCH I,II, and III vids and the PSA title vids...to watch it on video...that will prove that it can be done by YOU to at least get to a III, let alone HIGH LEVEL, with 1 dog...
> 
> So rook is the first dog you trained this way? out of 34 dogs? and he is 1 out of 4 that you have trained this way?
> 
> Do you still feel ANY dog can be trained to HIGH LEVEL with 100% positive after all of this? Even though everyone, has disagreed with this statement.
> 
> You are basing this statement on your personal experiences owning 4 dogs "trained" this way, with a BH (or 2) under your belt, out of 34 dogs you owned and trained for PP.
> 
> I think it was maybe a year and a half ago you did not know what "jam" meant in bitework...now you claim you can train ANY dog, regardless of drive or hardness 100% positive to HIGH LEVEL sport...you learn SUPER fast...
> 
> 
> anyhow...I am just bored, had a few days off, it was entertaining...and informative...and you are right, it was the ANY dog that got my panties bunched...


Joby what do you think? 
And what you missed in all of this is I wasn't going on just what I had done personally, but what I had observed. Watching people like Bob. Please remember Bob and I used to belong to the same schutzhund club. So while I've only actually trained two to a BH and two to a partial SCh1 OB routine (OB pattern plus the flat/jump retrieve and send out) and currently training the fourth... my pup. As well as one of them to a PSA 1 OB routine (just started training PSA about two half months ago). I've had the opportunity to watch 15- 20 other people training this same way. The other thirty dogs were train using Koehler way and I still have his book among others on my shelf.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Eric Read said:


> Pretty much, but you see us "educated" folks like to put new fancy names on things and say , "see, look at what we discovered"
> 
> But I guess I should clarify, I like to be even more simple, reward what I want, punish what I think needs punishing and try and be consistent. where my "reinforcement" or "punishment" falls in the 4 quads, I guess someone else can figure that out. I'm still working on my consistency.


I had to take a test after a 5-day seminar including stress signals, R+ R- P+ P- and "how the dog learns".

I muttered to one of the chaps during a coffee break that all this language was new to me and I'd sure not be able to write it all down, in German, on my work paper. He said "shucks Gill, it's what dog training is about, you've been using some of these for years." I might say I scraped through the test and got a certificate but it didn't make me feel a better trainer.

I enjoy being on this forum but no forum can replace Club training - to have both is an asset.

There is no necessity to prove what you are at the Club - we can all see it, and in bitework, a good decoy will comment on the dog's work and quality and the handler's prowess or shortcomings so you either walk away with your tail between your legs or your head held high :lol:


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Yes Scott there has been. however because they are no names in the professional doggie sport world it's of no account. Go back and read the thread. You will also find that there is a schutzhund club here in St. Louis that uses this method of training for both OB and bitework and have been success it.on
> *The reason the thread has gone on so long is my use of the little word "any" and it has most everyone's panties in a bunch giving a wedgy affect and it's quite irritating for them*.


You'd have to try a lot harder to get my panties in a bunch...

Doesn't stop me pointing out that your statement was a guess at best and just BS at worst.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Eric Read said:


> positive reinforcement- you want the dog to sit, it sits, you give it a treat
> 
> Negative reinforcement- something unpleasant is removed to increase a behavior like a dog walks touching your leg because away from it, it gets stim'd till it touches again
> 
> positive punishment- dog bites handler, dog gets big prong collar correction. Punishment immediate to an action you want to stop
> 
> Negative punishment- a reward is taken away. If a dog has lost it's mind, won't think and is dirty in the blind, you might just go in pick him up and take him back to his crate for a while, or make him down outside the blind and take away all his fun for a while
> 
> that's pretty much it, and there is a bit of "gray" area in some of those definitions that can be debated, but the principles are pretty much the same.


Just to add, it is only reinforcement if it tends to make a behaviour repeat and it is only punishment if it tends to make a behaviour not repeat.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Ian Forbes said:


> You'd have to try a lot harder to get my panties in a bunch...
> 
> Doesn't stop me pointing out that your statement was a guess at best and just BS at worst.


Whatever GEORGE!! Can you be sure of that? How do you know have you been here and these people?


----------



## Christopher Jones

Im still waiting for a list of all these people that have titled all these super high level sport and police dogs using no corrections. None of this "Oh theres a club somewhere that has done it" or "I heard a guy in New York named Kevin did it a fews years ago."
Untill the ranks of all dog sports and police handlers are half full with these super tough dogs who have never had a correction in their training life, then all the rubbish being sprouted by people, saying its proven to be possible, just doesnt hold water.
I dont have anything against people trying to work out ways of training dogs using methods other than the norm, what I do have a problem with is people like Lynda, who hasnt done anything of any significance, with a dog that has no reputation for anything other than being on the end of a leash, telling me and others that the only reason we say it cant be done is because we are dumb asses who lack the intelligence to understand the "theory".


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Whatever GEORGE!! Can you be sure of that? How do you know have you been here and these people?


Comprehension 101 again. [-(

You are the one that made the claim that any dog (regardless of breed, temperament, drives etc.) could be trained to a high level using just 'motivational methods'. Since you have not met every dog on earth and then trained all of those dogs up to a high level, you are guessing (or bullshitting). QED!

The fact that some of the finest proponents of 'motivational training' in dogsports do not make the claim that you have, should make you think. We'll see....


----------



## Lynda Myers

Christopher Jones said:


> Im still waiting for a list of all these people that have titled all these super high level sport and police dogs using no corrections. None of this "Oh theres a club somewhere that has done it" or "I heard a guy in New York named Kevin did it a fews years ago."
> Untill the ranks of all dog sports and police handlers are half full with these super tough dogs who have never had a correction in their training life, then all the rubbish being sprouted by people, saying its proven to be possible, just doesnt hold water.
> I dont have anything against people trying to work out ways of training dogs using methods other than the norm, what I do have a problem with is people like Lynda, who hasnt done anything of any significance, with a dog that has no reputation for anything other than being on the end of a leash, telling me and others that the only reason we say it cant be done is because we are dumb asses who lack the intelligence to understand the "theory".


Christopher the question was had it been done and yes it has. Why are you letting what I personally believe color the fact there people who are in fact training this way? May I ask what have you done lately? What podium are you standing on. New flash titles aren't the end all and be all for evaluating the quality of training or metal of the dog. 
I didn't say you were a dumb ass or that you lack the intelligence to understand. Your face fixed your lips to say that all by itself. I only said that until one had actually done it they wouldn't understand...very big difference. I think most are quite capable if only they put their bias down for a moment. You on the other hand said they were dumb asses and lacked intelligence not I.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Ian Forbes said:


> Comprehension 101 again. [-(
> 
> You are the one that made the claim that any dog (regardless of breed, temperament, drives etc.) could be trained to a high level using just 'motivational methods'. Since you have not met every dog on earth and then trained all of those dogs up to a high level, you are guessing (or bullshitting). QED!
> 
> The fact that some of the finest proponents of 'motivational training' in dogsports do not make the claim that you have, should make you think. We'll see....


Ian, Where did I say that? Show me where I said that.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Im just going to throw a random statement out there that my old man used to swing at us when we where kids and feeling allknowing and stubborn...if anyone feels its might apply to them ? so be it !

*When a person walks up to you and says "your a donkey" you would do best to ignore them

When 3 people walk up to you and say "your a donkey" start thinking......

When 10 people walk up to you and say "your a donkey" then you had best find a mirror quick to see if you have grown large floppy ears and funny looking teath....










*


----------



## Christopher Jones

Lynda Myers said:


> Christopher the question was had it been done and yes it has. Why are you letting what I personally believe color the fact there people who are in fact training this way? May I ask what have you done lately? What podium are you standing on. New flash titles aren't the end all and be all for evaluating the quality of training or metal of the dog.
> I didn't say you were a dumb ass or that you lack the intelligence to understand. Your face fixed your lips to say that all by itself. I only said that until one had actually done it they wouldn't understand...very big difference. I think most are quite capable if only they put their bias down for a moment. You on the other hand said they were dumb asses and lacked intelligence not I.


So which world champion competitor has trained a dog to this level and not used corrections?
Names please.
The reality that you have to come to grips with is that the idea of training strong dogs in bite sports without ever having to correct them is not backed by any results you can put forward. Some guy somewhere who said he did it doesnt count. 
The reason that 100% of world level sport competitors and police dogs handlers that have strong dogs dont use your way of training is cos it doesnt work. 
Dont answer this post unless you can put forward a world level trainer in bite sports who has never corrected their dog.


----------



## Ian Forbes

Lynda Myers said:


> Ian, Where did I say that? Show me where I said that.


In response to the original question:



Lynda Myers said:


> Yes I have as have several others and contrary to what others will tell you or believe *it can be done with dogs of any kind, drive or hardness*. the trick is in knowing how to read your dog and knowing what motivates him.
> of course a good understanding of the method is a must.


Glad to help!


----------



## Tommy O'Hanlon

Alice the donkey reply is to die for, sheer class,
Tommy


----------



## David Frost

Just checking here, hopefully this doesn't dissolve further into name-calling. If there is more on-topic discussion, we'll let this 49 page thread continue. If not, it will die a quick death.

DFrost


----------



## maggie fraser

_Humpty Dumpty took the book and looked at it carefully. ...and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday presents ..._
_There's glory for you!'_

_`I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said._

_Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'_

_`But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected._

_*`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'*_

_`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'_

_`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all. Impenetrability! That's what I say!'_

_`Oh!' said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark_


----------



## Doug Zaga

49 pages to review is too much this morning.

Can anyone explain if the OP's have identified any teams who have titled a sport dog with Motivation ONLY?

Just trying to get my question answered :-s


----------



## Joby Becker

Doug Zaga said:


> 49 pages to review is too much this morning.
> 
> Can anyone explain if the OP's have identified any teams who have titled a sport dog with Motivation ONLY?
> 
> Just trying to get my question answered :-s


from what I remember, before I got sidetracked... there are a few people that have titled in Schutzhund, a BH and one to a III, that post on here, and a couple more that do not post here.

No one said anything about any other sport, and most said even though it is possible, it would a good percentage of the dog's potential untapped, in their opinion, but they don't train that way...

So IT is possible, so far verified possible in Schutzhund, with the "right dog" and the right trainer...congrats to those that have done it...any other sports?


----------



## Doug Zaga

Now I am really confused...I take it that there is no one out there that can prove it has been done in Schutzhund? Motivational only that it is!


----------



## Christopher Jones

Joby Becker said:


> So IT is possible, so far verified possible in Schutzhund, with the "right dog" and the right trainer...congrats to those that have done it...any other sports?


Thats the crux of this issue. Every sane person will say that a particular dog could be trained with little (I wont so no because as far I am concerned using your voice to correct with certain dogs is like using an electric collar on others) compulsion. However not all dogs can be trained positive only, especially in the bitework. If someone has a dog would could learn the KNPV or Ring or IPO bitework and never needed a correction to do so, well thats not a dog im interested in knowing anything about. You can keep him.
The problem is that people like Lynda think that any dog, even dogs like Wibo, Carlos and Endor for instance, could be trained to PH1 and never have to be corrected. Thats just plain bullshit.


----------



## Joby Becker

Doug Zaga said:


> Now I am really confused...I take it that there is no one out there that can prove it has been done in Schutzhund? Motivational only that it is!


http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f38/new-schh-iii-title-holder-bob-scott-thunder-9232/

Yes Bob has done it to a III, and Lynda to a BH. And there are a few others I am sure, so far I hvae only heard about SCH though...Bob has not used any leash or collar corrections. It can be done...with the right dog and apparently the right sport...(so far)..congrats to both by the way...

motivational is a broad term, I think NO PHYSICAL CORRECTIONS is what is really being discussed...




Christopher Jones said:


> Thats the crux of this issue. Every sane person will say that a particular dog could be trained with little (I wont so no because as far I am concerned using your voice to correct with certain dogs is like using an electric collar on others) compulsion. However not all dogs can be trained positive only, especially in the bitework. If someone has a dog would could learn the KNPV or Ring or IPO bitework and never needed a correction to do so, well thats not a dog im interested in knowing anything about. You can keep him.
> The problem is that people like Lynda think that any dog, even dogs like Wibo, Carlos and Endor for instance, could be trained to PH1 and never have to be corrected. Thats just plain bullshit.


or your dogs, or my dog, or greg's dogs, jody's dogs, Martine's dogs, Alice's dogs, or Mike's dogs, or Rick R's dogs, or Jeff's dogs, or the thousands of others across the world..some dogs can't even be titled ever, corrections or not, cause they are just too much...I agree a voice correction can be the same as a full power e collar correction depending on the dog and what state of mind he is in...

my 2nd post in this thread was:



Joby Becker said:


> competitive bitework without compulsion would probably be impossible with the type of dogs I like personally...


I agree Chris..It was even stated that the KNPV breeders breed insane drives and toughness in their dog, so that they "still have a dog left" after all the harsh training methods used...LOL
I think the harsh methods are used mostly to control the dogs, which are bred to do a serious job, and can be very serious dogs, fighting a man is the highest reward possible to some dogs..IF if a dog would rather chew on a metal pipe than the 1/2 lb of raw meat sitting next to the pipe, I don't think a treat or a tug is gonna work in the bitework...for that dog, if his drive is equal on the man.


----------



## tracey schneider

> .I agree a voice correction can be the same as a full power e collar correction depending on the dog and what state of mind he is in...


Actually in some dogs it can be worse and create more conflict within the team. 

t


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Christopher Jones said:


> Im still waiting for a list of all these people that have titled all these super high level sport and police dogs using no corrections. None of this "Oh theres a club somewhere that has done it" or "I heard a guy in New York named Kevin did it a fews years ago."
> Untill the ranks of all dog sports and police handlers are half full with these super tough dogs who have never had a correction in their training life, then all the rubbish being sprouted by people, saying its proven to be possible, just doesnt hold water.
> I dont have anything against people trying to work out ways of training dogs using methods other than the norm, what I do have a problem with is people like Lynda, who hasnt done anything of any significance, with a dog that has no reputation for anything other than being on the end of a leash, telling me and others that the only reason we say it cant be done is because we are dumb asses who lack the intelligence to understand the "theory".


That was really putting it in a nutshell and I agree with you.
But on the other hand. you wont hear how the "other side" really train. Germany isn't allowed to use lthe TIG, Switzerland not allowed to use TIG or prong officially and all those "Super" dog trainers showing how it works without Zwang (force) will not be showing videos of how *they* actually train their dogs.

For me it's a "verlogene Welt", and the "just positive" trainers are often unaware that they are not training as positively as they think they are. I need say no more because enough examples have been given.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Alice Bezemer said:


> Im just going to throw a random statement out there that my old man used to swing at us when we where kids and feeling allknowing and stubborn...if anyone feels its might apply to them ? so be it !
> 
> *When a person walks up to you and says "your a donkey" you would do best to ignore them
> 
> When 3 people walk up to you and say "your a donkey" start thinking......
> 
> When 10 people walk up to you and say "your a donkey" then you had best find a mirror quick to see if you have grown large floppy ears and funny looking teath....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


While that's a cute picture and all. I was always taught by my Father that it isn't what others say you are that determines who you are. But what you say about yourself. I prefer not to give anyone that much power over me as to define who I am and what I can do.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Christopher Jones said:


> So which world champion competitor has trained a dog to this level and not used corrections?
> Names please.
> The reality that you have to come to grips with is that the idea of training strong dogs in bite sports without ever having to correct them is not backed by any results you can put forward. Some guy somewhere who said he did it doesnt count.
> The reason that 100% of world level sport competitors and police dogs handlers that have strong dogs dont use your way of training is cos it doesnt work.
> Dont answer this post unless you can put forward a world level trainer in bite sports who has never corrected their dog.


HEHEHEHE
No, not necessarily might it actually be because of the time frame that they have to work under. Some professional handlers/trainers also make their living by training dogs and PSD trainers need to have dogs ready to go so time also becomes important for them as well. Because of this they will use methods that yield a quicker product. So that virtually eliminates marker based training as a stand only method. And because they are successful people want to emulate or copy what brought about the most success in the shortest amount of time. 

Did you not read Jim Nash's post regarding a very hard dog that could not be compelled to out for any reason. The only thing that worked was a reward based method! Sure he had to go to extremes with it. But it was the only one that worked to get the dog to place of understanding of what was wanted.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Yagus van duvatorre. Probably spelled the kennel wrong.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Yagus van duvatorre. Probably spelled the kennel wrong.



http://www.mario-verslype.be/2_Engels/indexEN.htm

Yagus van de Duvetorre trained by Mario Verslype...he competed 9 times in a world championship in FCI or FMBB with 3 wins using clickertraining.

Got to love how he promotes the Innotek Site on his site tho...


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Alice Bezemer said:


> http://www.mario-verslype.be/2_Engels/indexEN.htm
> 
> Yagus van de Duvetorre trained by Mario Verslype...he competed 9 times in a world championship in FCI or FMBB with 3 wins using clickertraining.
> 
> Got to love how he promotes the Innotek Site on his site tho...


Hi Alice,

Mario is a hell of a trainer and I LOVE Yagus BUT just cause Mario (or anyone else) uses clicker training does not mean he never uses compulsion. Which I thought was the original claim?
I use marker training a lot to train, BUT I still use mild compulsion for proofing.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Not really the point that I was making. It is a start to learning a program that involves positive, and negative.

Most people fail, because there is no program, or the plan here or there doesn't fit.

I would love to see how much compulsion was actually used. I would hope not a lot, but it is interesting to think about.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Thomas Barriano said:


> Hi Alice,
> 
> Mario is a hell of a trainer and I LOVE Yagus BUT just cause Mario (or anyone else) uses clicker training does not mean he never uses compulsion. Which I thought was the original claim?
> I use marker training a lot to train, BUT I still use mild compulsion for proofing.


I have to agree that Mario is a brilliant trainer...hes progressive in what he does and ive heard of him a few years ago....not many people know him here in the netherlands i think but the people who do know him seem to be very impressed by his dog and his way of training....



Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Not really the point that I was making. It is a start to learning a program that involves positive, and negative.
> 
> Most people fail, because there is no program, or the plan here or there doesn't fit.
> 
> I would love to see how much compulsion was actually used. I would hope not a lot, but it is interesting to think about.


Im with you with liking to know howmuch was used as well...i think with positive you can reach a long way but theres just no getting rid of the compulsion in any way even if it would be in the smallest thing...in my eyes the moment bitework begins then so do the problems....

but im basing that on what i have seen in 20 years of working dogs...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I can dream can't I ?? LOL


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Not really the point that I was making. It is a start to learning a program that involves positive, and negative.
> 
> Most people fail, because there is no program, or the plan here or there doesn't fit.
> 
> I would love to see how much compulsion was actually used. I would hope not a lot, but it is interesting to think about.


Thanks for the reference. It would be neat to pick his brain. This is basically where I'm at in my training--coming up with that plan/progam based on what I'm learning with 3 totally different dogs. This is where I'd like to see the discussion go and continue.

Terrasita


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I can dream can't I ?? LOL



sure ya can  but do ya have to do it out loud ! Just kidding


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Currently the people on here attempting these manuevers are not going to make it, sorry, just had to say it out loud. 

1, To piss you off, so that you try harder.

2, Because I want you to know that I believe, just not in you. Try not to take it badly, it is a lack of faith on my part.

However, if you were to take a small pup from strong lines, that tests strongly, and went out and trained the dog in the program with positive, doing all the exercises, twice a day, without mistakes, I feel you might actually accomplish something. I think Dutch dogs are off in the head for the most part, so I would try something Belgian/French.

I think that the dog would have to be isolated, and in a very small kennel environment.

Basically you would have to control the shit out of this dog.

That puppy guy with his 40 minutes twice a day got me thinking. Bad when I do that, as I am not an idiot.


----------



## Christopher Jones

Gillian Schuler said:


> But on the other hand. you wont hear how the "other side" really train. Germany isn't allowed to use lthe TIG, Switzerland not allowed to use TIG or prong officially and all those "Super" dog trainers showing how it works without Zwang (force) will not be showing videos of how *they* actually train their dogs.
> 
> For me it's a "verlogene Welt", and the "just positive" trainers are often unaware that they are not training as positively as they think they are. I need say no more because enough examples have been given.


Thats actually something I came to understand. We had a seminar here with Flinks and Bayer and we were having a few drinks afterwards. I was talking to Alex Bayer and asking him about different training problems. He then says "Look, you have to understand how people really train in their own backyards compared to what they say at seminars or in general conversations. The reality is the all use strong compulsions, and they way they really train you could not put in a seminar."
And Alex has trained with alot of well known, sucessful trainers in Germany and Belgium.
Its like when a multiple WUSV winner gave a seminar here he said that he never uses e-collars in training. Yet he wore a different Innotek cap on every day of the seminar. We then asked people who train with him and they confirmed he uses e-collars.
No more seminars for me.


----------



## Christopher Jones

Alice Bezemer said:


> http://www.mario-verslype.be/2_Engels/indexEN.htm
> 
> Yagus van de Duvetorre trained by Mario Verslype...he competed 9 times in a world championship in FCI or FMBB with 3 wins using clickertraining.
> 
> Got to love how he promotes the Innotek Site on his site tho...


And this dog backs up my point about a dog that can be trained without much compulsion I want nothing to do with.


----------



## Jim Nash

Lynda Myers said:


> HEHEHEHE
> No, not necessarily might it actually be because of the time frame that they have to work under. Some professional handlers/trainers also make their living by training dogs and PSD trainers need to have dogs ready to go so time also becomes important for them as well. Because of this they will use methods that yield a quicker product. So that virtually eliminates marker based training as a stand only method. And because they are successful people want to emulate or copy what brought about the most success in the shortest amount of time.
> 
> Did you not read Jim Nash's post regarding a very hard dog that could not be compelled to out for any reason. The only thing that worked was a reward based method! Sure he had to go to extremes with it. But it was the only one that worked to get the dog to place of understanding of what was wanted.


I don't think you read my post concerning that dog well enough or you just don't have a picture in you mind of the type of dog we were dealing with or how we did it . Sure it was based on a training method that was more positive but it was changed and adapted to this dog . 

I don't call having a dog holding onto a sleeve for 40 minutes with all 4 paws off the ground then being sent on to another helper to hang off the sleeves for a long time again as being purely positive or noncompulsive . Sure there was a reward . But no compulsion ? 

This dog was pushed to his physical limits . Both in his jaw muscles and aerobically . So much so we were very concerned for his health from overheating . This was the most dangerous thing I have ever seen us do with a K9 concerning it's physical well being . But the alternative was the dog being PTS since it was a dog donated to us from another agency whose trainers couldn't get control of him and if we didn't take him he was going to be put down . 

I'm not sure you using the training of this dog to support your purely positive methods is because you really didn't understand the dog or training or if it's because your getting desperate . Whatever the reason if you looked at it closely the training didn't apply to your purely positive stance and is a BIG reach if your trying to use it to support your views .


----------



## Jim Nash

Lynda Myers said:


> HEHEHEHE
> No, not necessarily might it actually be because of the time frame that they have to work under. Some professional handlers/trainers also make their living by training dogs and PSD trainers need to have dogs ready to go so time also becomes important for them as well. Because of this they will use methods that yield a quicker product. So that virtually eliminates marker based training as a stand only method. And because they are successful people want to emulate or copy what brought about the most success in the shortest amount of time.
> 
> Did you not read Jim Nash's post regarding a very hard dog that could not be compelled to out for any reason. The only thing that worked was a reward based method! Sure he had to go to extremes with it. But it was the only one that worked to get the dog to place of understanding of what was wanted.



The only thing I will agree with you on in this post is the time constraint issue in training a PSD with PURELY positive training methods . But once the K9 is out of the initial PSD training class and out on the streets with the handler it is possible to try purely positive training . As a matter of fact if you have read any of my posts about positive , motivational , complusive , and correction based training I believe in training in as positive and motivational training as possible and have attempted to go as far as I could with my current dog. It was great in the foundational training and then some in certain other areas with him but it only went so far . If I could of acheived success with 100% positive training with him I certainly would have and certainly tried my best to do that .

Once again , I'm all for more positive and motivational based training for K9s , especially in my field of PSD training . But it's folks like you with your unrealistic statements about it , that take away from the credibilty of this training as very beneficial training method and that stigma has made it tough for me to convince others to put more of it into the training of their K9s .


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Currently the people on here attempting these manuevers are not going to make it, sorry, just had to say it out loud.
> 
> 1, To piss you off, so that you try harder.
> 
> 2, Because I want you to know that I believe, just not in you. Try not to take it badly, it is a lack of faith on my part.
> 
> However, if you were to take a small pup from strong lines, that tests strongly, and went out and trained the dog in the program with positive, doing all the exercises, twice a day, without mistakes, I feel you might actually accomplish something. I think Dutch dogs are off in the head for the most part, so I would try something Belgian/French.
> 
> I think that the dog would have to be isolated, and in a very small kennel environment.
> 
> Basically you would have to control the shit out of this dog.
> 
> That puppy guy with his 40 minutes twice a day got me thinking. Bad when I do that, as I am not an idiot.


 
So at this point, given your interest, type of dogs, and ability to direct the helpers, would you try it with any or your current dogs or the next puppy you start?

Terrasita


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

No. No interest really. I don't have much time left in dog sports, so I want to get titles on my dogs. Gonna be hard enough as it is.


----------



## Randy Allen

Sorry to be late to this, wish I'd tuned in earlier. Just waded through all 50 pages of this discussion(?).
Lynda, you really need to re-examine what you're talking about, because you don't know.

Somehow you've decided that positive only applies just to the ring. Well really!!??? You're either a positive only trainer or you're like the rest of us and use what seems to work at the moment.
Let's face it, the arena of dog sports (any sport) is just a limited set of exercises to learn when compared to what happens in the real world.
You've found that positive breaks down with something as simple as manners within the house, well what a surprise! So now out of sight of your peers you've got no compunction about using physical corrections. Talk about a hypocrite.

Make up your mind. Are you a positive only trainer or not?


----------



## Sherry Spivey

Not that I have tons of experience in protection, but have been to train with some people that are "famous" for positive training methods and they introduced my young dog to a prong collar and wanted me to go to e-collar. That was definitely not was I was expecting based on videos I had seen, and "training philosophy" that was espoused. 

I like positive methods, but my dog is strong and seems to perform better when she gets an occassional butt kicking. It's almost that she pushes me to do it to know that I mean it. So I have settled for a positive approach but use compulsion as needed. That seems to be the case for most of the other trainers I have seen as well.


----------



## maggie fraser

Sherry Spivey said:


> Not that I have tons of experience in protection, but have been to train with some people that are "famous" for positive training methods and they introduced my young dog to a prong collar and wanted me to go to e-collar.
> 
> 
> 
> That was definitely not was I was expecting based on videos I had seen, and "training philosophy" that was espoused.
Click to expand...

 
Sherry, who were these 'famous' positive method trainers if you don't mind me asking? Thanks.


----------



## Martine Loots

Alice Bezemer said:


> I have to agree that Mario is a brilliant trainer...hes progressive in what he does and ive heard of him a few years ago....not many people know him here in the netherlands i think but the people who do know him seem to be very impressed by his dog and his way of training....


I do know him and he's a very good trainer indeed. And he does use compulsion (in a good way), believe me


----------



## Candy Eggert

Sherry Spivey said:


> I like positive methods, but my dog is strong and seems to perform better when she gets an occassional butt kicking. It's almost that she pushes me to do it to know that I mean it..


As most strong charactered dogs do Sherry  You don't make dogs weaker (unless they are weak to begin with) by correcting them when they know exactly what they are supposed to do. In fact, the opposite I feel. Most of us lay down a positive foundation first before heading down other avenues. Regardless of what others may imagine  

Corrections are not some midevil torture device as some have inferred but rather a form of communication. Pretty simple really.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Martine Loots said:


> I do know him and he's a very good trainer indeed. And he does use compulsion (in a good way), believe me


Hi Martine,

Of course Mario uses compulsion, as does every other "positive" trainer 
The positive only trainer is a myth.


----------



## Amy Swaby

Long thread is long, not sure if it was mentioned, but Steve White supposedly trains police dogs with "positive" methods. I'm not sure how true this is, he's just who comes up when people talk about it every time.

http://www.i2ik9.com/


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Amy Swaby said:


> Long thread is long, not sure if it was mentioned, but Steve White supposedly trains police dogs with "positive" methods. I'm not sure how true this is, he's just who comes up when people talk about it every time.
> 
> http://www.i2ik9.com/


Amy,

I have Steve's HITT DVD set. I think he is more a tracking/trailing/VST trainer then a patrol dog trainer. He may use "positive" methods, but does he use ONLY positive methods?


----------



## Alice Bezemer

been reading up on the i1ik9 site and found some intresting stuff there...floweresscence therapy ? i was checking the staff page and found some intresting stuff on the developer and use of this kind of therapy...maybe im reading to much into it but im not sure what i should think about it tho...yall have a look around for yourself...i have my own ideas that im not putting into words as of yet about the whole floweresscence thing.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Randy Allen said:


> Sorry to be late to this, wish I'd tuned in earlier. Just waded through all 50 pages of this discussion(?).
> Lynda, you really need to re-examine what you're talking about, because you don't know.
> 
> Somehow you've decided that positive only applies just to the ring. Well really!!??? You're either a positive only trainer or you're like the rest of us and use what seems to work at the moment.
> Let's face it, the arena of dog sports (any sport) is just a limited set of exercises to learn when compared to what happens in the real world.
> You've found that positive breaks down with something as simple as manners within the house, well what a surprise! So now out of sight of your peers you've got no compunction about using physical corrections. Talk about a hypocrite.
> 
> Make up your mind. Are you a positive only trainer or not?


I have made up my mind...
Positive when training behaviors for sport whether at home or on the field. But at home given the behavior (not one used in sport) will be dealt with not so positive depending on what it is. Training is about being clear and it's very clear and well understood by my dogs what the rules are. Some behaviors I choose not to pussy foot around with...like bolting out the door/gate, biting the hand that feeds you or since I have now and in the past had bulldogs (Pit and Amer) will not tolerate fighting. So will squash it the moment it's ugly little head appears. It's not about being out of sight of my peers, because if I'm going to correct I don't care who's around it's going to happen. 
With that said all of my ob and bitework is trained motivationally. 
To each his own.


----------



## Lynda Myers

Candy Eggert said:


> As most strong charactered dogs do Sherry  You don't make dogs weaker (unless they are weak to begin with) by correcting them when they know exactly what they are supposed to do. In fact, the opposite I feel. Most of us lay down a positive foundation first before heading down other avenues. Regardless of what others may imagine
> 
> Corrections are not some midevil torture device as some have inferred but rather a form of communication. Pretty simple really.


Ok so how do you know when the dog knows what "it" is? What is the indicator that he knows?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Maybe the dog has been doing it every time when asked for weeks....and then gives you the finger. I would say he knew what was being asked. Dog comes like clockwork then one day, gives you the finger. It isn't hard to figure out when a dog knows a command.....he does it. Then, one day he decides not to. Let's face it, it isn't like the dog needs to be led around by a treat all the time.


----------



## Joby Becker

Lynda Myers said:


> Ok so how do you know when the dog knows what "it" is? What is the indicator that he knows?


if he does it for a click, treat, tug or ball consistently,,,9 times out of 10 then he KNOWS it..(in my opinion)
PERIOD. once he KNOWS it..he KNOWS it...then you can ENFORCE it, PROOF it. FAIRLY...with corrections...


----------



## Candy Eggert

Don Turnipseed said:


> Maybe the dog has been doing it every time when asked for weeks....and then gives you the finger. I would say he knew what was being asked. Dog comes like clockwork then one day, gives you the finger. It isn't hard to figure out when a dog knows a command.....he does it. Then, one day he decides not to. Let's face it, it isn't like the dog needs to be led around by a treat all the time.


Exactly Don  But it was a "motivational" finger  :lol:


----------



## Candy Eggert

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IU1bzZheWk


----------



## Joby Becker

Candy Eggert said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IU1bzZheWk


benny hill is AWESOME...


----------



## Candy Eggert

Joby Becker said:


> benny hill is AWESOME...


Yes he is!! Beating a dead horse is rather blaise (yawn) :lol:


----------



## Maren Bell Jones

Joby Becker said:


> if he does it for a click, treat, tug or ball consistently,,,9 times out of 10 then he KNOWS it..(in my opinion)
> PERIOD. once he KNOWS it..he KNOWS it...then you can ENFORCE it, PROOF it. FAIRLY...with corrections...


I'd argue not necessarily, especially if it is outside the 3 Ds (distance, duration, distraction) that the dog is used to. I'm trying to be better about this myself, cause I can totally be guilty of expecting a behavior out of a dog because they've done it before, so thinking "they should know better," right? That's also assuming the dog is feeling fine and healthy and ready to work. I felt pretty darn guilty a few years ago working one of my old dogs in agility and making him jump and perform the contact obstacles because he was off and on balking. Finally looked at his paws and he had at some point blown the main pads on his front feet. #-o Not saying never use compulsion to proof stuff (cause I do too), but I think the longer I train in even simple things, the slower I try to reach for the compulsion thinking of that great von Stephanitz quote...


----------



## Lou Castle

Amy Swaby said:


> Long thread is long, not sure if it was mentioned, but Steve White supposedly trains police dogs with "positive" methods. I'm not sure how true this is, he's just who comes up when people talk about it every time.
> 
> http://www.i2ik9.com/


Steve has told me that he has never been able to train a patrol dog using only _"positive methods."_


----------



## Mary Buck

Lynda Myers said:


> I have made up my mind...
> Positive when training behaviors for sport whether at home or on the field. But at home given the behavior (not one used in sport) will be dealt with not so positive depending on what it is. Training is about being clear and it's very clear and well understood by my dogs what the rules are. Some behaviors I choose not to pussy foot around with...like bolting out the door/gate, biting the hand that feeds you or since I have now and in the past had bulldogs (Pit and Amer) will not tolerate fighting. So will squash it the moment it's ugly little head appears. It's not about being out of sight of my peers, because if I'm going to correct I don't care who's around it's going to happen.
> With that said all of my ob and bitework is trained motivationally.
> To each his own.


waffle


----------



## Joby Becker

Maren Bell Jones said:


> I'd argue not necessarily, especially if it is outside the 3 Ds (distance, duration, distraction) that the dog is used to. I'm trying to be better about this myself, cause I can totally be guilty of expecting a behavior out of a dog because they've done it before, so thinking "they should know better," right? That's also assuming the dog is feeling fine and healthy and ready to work. I felt pretty darn guilty a few years ago working one of my old dogs in agility and making him jump and perform the contact obstacles because he was off and on balking. Finally looked at his paws and he had at some point blown the main pads on his front feet. #-o Not saying never use compulsion to proof stuff (cause I do too), but I think the longer I train in even simple things, the slower I try to reach for the compulsion thinking of that great von Stephanitz quote...


of course....I am not advocating correcting the crap out of dog just because it doesn't perform..it was asked when the dog knows...that was my answer..if you have a dog that repeats a behavior on command for a treat reliably, would you not say it knows what the command is?


----------



## Amy Swaby

Lou Castle said:


> Steve has told me that he has never been able to train a patrol dog using only _"positive methods."_



Thanks actually Lou, the next time he comes up on those boards I'll point that out.


----------



## Bob Scott

Now that we all have the answer in our minds I think it's time to quit hashing this to point of true boredome! 
Thread closed! :wink:


----------

