# Variety in training- good or bad???



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

I tried to search for this without success, so if there is a thread already feel free to redirect me.

I read on a recent topic about possible issues with dogs seeing a different decoy in a different environment due to lack of exposure or something like that. 

So, it made me wonder if training with different people in different places could actually help, or hinder your dog's progress?

I understand that, for example, if IPO is your chosen sport- then training with FR folks where the dog can bite legs and whatever could mess you up when it's trial time- so in that case stick to sleeves.

But...if made clear what protection style you are after, would it be a good thing to train with several decoys in different environments so the dog really "gets it" vs following a pattern? 

I could be horribly off base since I am obviously still learning, but I think exposure has a lot to do with the dog being truly solid.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

many people that train IPO, work dogs in the bitesuit as well. and some sport people also train muzzle...

all i can say if you want to pattern train, pattern train.

And it depends on a few other factors...

i think it is best to stick with one decoy/trainer, through foundation, if YOU are not as knowlegeable, to be able to dictate what has been done and how with the dog, especially if he has issues or problems being sorted out..

if you do go to different people, it is imperative that everyone that works the dog is "on the same page" with a dog with issues or problems...

other than that, I say the more decoys and the more environments the better....


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Sally said;
"I could be horribly off base since I am obviously still learning, but I think exposure has a lot to do with the dog being truly solid."

Bingo on the first requirement (solid dog) but the TD and decoy better know what they are doing WITH that dog. :wink:


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Joby Becker said:


> many people that train IPO, work dogs in the bitesuit as well. and some sport people also train muzzle...
> 
> all i can say if you want to pattern train, pattern train.
> 
> ...


I do not want to pattern train, I just want the dog to react appropriately no master where and whom I'm with.

He will bite either a suit or sleeve, and I think the issue I had is resolved through better obedience. My dog was on a sleeve pretty early, but the first time he got the suit- he seemed to think all parts were fair game and went for a face once. I backed off bite work, focused on control and now I think we are at a place for progression. 

I would make clear to any decoy what I am after as far as where I want him biting, the amount of pressure, etc. 

So when you say foundation, are you referring to the initial basics such as building confidence, grips, the outs, etc- or things a bit further down like running blinds or coming across cars to fight?

I am by no means an expert, but have seen and done enough to know when to call a time out with this one.

So, with that being said- for a complete newbie you say stick to one way/decoy...BUT if you have a clue, the more the merrier? Just being sure I read you right....been a whacky day and the brain is a bit fatigued : /


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Sally Crunkleton said:


> I do not want to pattern train, I just want the dog to react appropriately no master where and whom I'm with.
> 
> He will bite either a suit or sleeve, and I think the issue I had is resolved through better obedience. My dog was on a sleeve pretty early, but the first time he got the suit- he seemed to think all parts were fair game and went for a face once. I backed off bite work, focused on control and now I think we are at a place for progression.
> 
> ...


I am not sure IF you have a clue or not, but because you worked in a suit, and the dog went for the face, and you say it is an OB issue, that is an issue to me...that issue is more better resolved by a decoy, and just the fact that he went for the face, tells me to stick with a good decoy (by himself) for a while.. to get him more solid on the suit, and proper targets...

what sport are you training?


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Bob Scott said:


> Bingo on the first requirement (solid dog) but the TD and decoy better know what they are doing WITH that dog. :wink:


Yes Bob! Not suggesting I think otherwise....you know who I train with and there are no complaints there. Since our old Sch club is no more, I have sorta wondered if I should try something different, or stick to what is familiar. 

I had inquiries from folks wanting to "test drive" my dog. They are actual dog people from a variety of sport and LE backgrounds, and not local pub guys (no offense to Peter if he reads this!). I was just hesitant to try in fear of possibly regressing what we have already started. But at the same time, if I can get more than 1 day a week of training in that would be nice.

Just seems convenient for me if this day works better than that day some weeks- but I wanted more input before I turn the beast loose.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Joby Becker said:


> I am not sure IF you have a clue or not, but because you worked in a suit, and the dog went for the face, and you say it is an OB issue, that is an issue to me...that issue is more better resolved by a decoy, and just the fact that he went for the face, tells me to stick with a good decoy (by himself) for a while.. to get him more solid on the suit, and proper targets...
> 
> what sport are you training?


I am not here to debate on IF I have a clue because I do. So I guess a history lesson on this face incident is needed...

Dog was on sleeve at 5 months old- and very confident. Around 1 year dog gets to bite suit (different decoy) in a mock "real life threat" because guy just wanted to see what he would do in that scenario. Dog is fine until decoy grabs and shakes me- dog grabs decoy by shoulder and gets him off me. Done.

After this, I was walking him at night - not at training, and a guy ran up to me from across the road, and dog was airborne for his face. No one was bitten, but I think the dog being only a year old thought- a man running at her is not ok, and he reacted.

It could have been ugly, but thank God it was not. However, that is why I decided to back off of biting until he better understood excitement vs a threat. 

That was 2 1/2 years ago, and we are way past it. Maybe I should have used "exposure issue" instead of OB, but the point is he didn't go for a decoys face while in a suit...and he was quite young with little to no "scenario" set ups.

As far as my training goals, I only have limited experience with IPO, so initially that's all I wanted to train for because it's familiar, but now I am wondering if something else could be just as fun for me and the dog.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

well I doubt that it was because he bit a suit once or twice, that he went for the face once in the dark for real..in a totally separate and different situation.

those seem like separate things to me..yet you seem to lump them into the same thing..

I have worked my dog almost exclusively on a suit, except for bite-building...have done civil and muzzle work, and the dog never went for anyones face..and if she did in the middle of the road and at night, I would not relate that to if she worked in a bitesuit...


Even if a dog was worked only in a sleeve, that does not mean it would not target elsewhere if the situation was perceived to be real...

some dogs target HIGH CENTER mass, and if the person is not experienced or it is NOT training....the reaction is to pull the head back, to move it away from the dog, to protect his face, which often draws dogs to the face, because of the movement...it is NOT a bitesuit issue...


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Joby Becker said:


> well I doubt that it was because he bit a suit once or twice, that he went for the face once in the dark for real..in a totally separate and different situation.
> 
> those seem like separate things to me..yet you seem to lump them into the same thing..
> 
> ...


Joby, I agree with you about the suit. Never said it was a suit issue. I am not blaming what or where he was allowed to bite at that time. It was once, long time ago, over. That is history...

If it "seems" I was lumping both into one- did not intend that. I simply decided to focus on a bite target other than above shoulders because of that.

My whole point seemed to be missed or misread. I am only asking from those who have done it both ways- one club/decoy/etc or using variety in those things whether it made for an all around better dog, or confused it. 

Let me say this though- had that man had a knife or intended to do me harm I would have been proud. AND, it's never cool to charge anyone, especially in the dark, especially when a dog is present. That's just not smart.

There is a wider range of experience from many venues on this forum compared to what I have access to in person, that's the only reason I asked.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Sally Crunkleton said:


> My dog was on a sleeve pretty early, *but the first time he got the suit- he seemed to think all parts were fair game and went for a face once*. I backed off bite work, focused on control and now I think we are at a place for progression.


looking at this quote hopefully you can see my confusion on the topic...

if you are serious about IPO, then stick to IPO...

if you dont care too much about success in sport, and want to expose the dog to other things, and you trust the people, go for it!!!!!


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Sally Crunkleton said:


> I tried to search for this without success, so if there is a thread already feel free to redirect me.
> 
> I read on a recent topic about possible issues with dogs seeing a different decoy in a different environment due to lack of exposure or something like that.
> 
> ...


Sally, going back to your original question...my dog is kind of a product of too many cooks in the kitchen. He had been on at least 15-20 different guys for the first nearly two years of his training and did not have a consistent training decoy for more than about 4 or 5 months at a time. Some were very good. Some were...not. :| So the last 3 months have been going back to foundations with one decoy and not working on anybody else for consistency and so everybody's on the same page. This has been the most productive. It is like working any kind of distraction in obedience or whatever else. Add in variables slowly. 

So if it was an ideal situation and I could work my dog from a pup again (as was the original plan, oh well...) I'd build him up gradually to taking pressure and distractions from one decoy/helper and then start again at a lower level with a second decoy, working it back up. Once the dog is comfortable, competent, and confident, start mixing it up. Go to train with other clubs on other locations or guys and see how they do. If there is inconsistency or issues that you notice, that information is only a good thing because then it lets you know what you need to work on. People who only trial their dogs at club trials on their usual practice fields with their usual training decoys/helpers may miss this. But I'd only mix it up after the dog had a real solid foundation with one (or two, if the club is lucky to have two solid decoy/helpers) guys. Like before a trial, make sure the dog will work on a different field with a different guy. Just be fair to the dog.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Sally, going back to your original question...my dog is kind of a product of too many cooks in the kitchen. He had been on at least 15-20 different guys for the first nearly two years of his training and did not have a consistent training decoy for more than about 4 or 5 months at a time. Some were very good. Some were...not. :| So the last 3 months have been going back to foundations with one decoy and not working on anybody else for consistency and so everybody's on the same page. This has been the most productive. It is like working any kind of distraction in obedience or whatever else. Add in variables slowly.
> 
> So if it was an ideal situation and I could work my dog from a pup again (as was the original plan, oh well...) I'd build him up gradually to taking pressure and distractions from one decoy/helper and then start again at a lower level with a second decoy, working it back up. Once the dog is comfortable, competent, and confident, start mixing it up. Go to train with other clubs on other locations or guys and see how they do. If there is inconsistency or issues that you notice, that information is only a good thing because then it lets you know what you need to work on. People who only trial their dogs at club trials on their usual practice fields with their usual training decoys/helpers may miss this. But I'd only mix it up after the dog had a real solid foundation with one (or two, if the club is lucky to have two solid decoy/helpers) guys. Like before a trial, make sure the dog will work on a different field with a different guy. Just be fair to the dog.


great post...I agree...


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Joby, yes....after reading again how I worded it, did seem that's what I meant- but now that we are all clear on that one... 

Maren, thanks for sharing. That does sound like way too much too soon. I am curious how old your dog was, or what foundation had been set before the merry-go-round of decoys began?

Much of the advice about foundation and confidence has already been applied or should I say re-applied with this dog. 

It makes the most sense to get the ground work done and see consistency before adding and mixing- I have not mixed yet btw except for doing bh routines in odd places for extra practice and distractions.

I have seen both sides of the fence as far as some who only trial on their training field, and those that go anywhere and let the dog try anything. I suppose it does depend on what you want from the dog.....titles or experience- which can be a 2 way street, but for some it's more about winning.

I know many people don't think much of IPO anymore, or it is watered down- but I still like it...especially now that you can get just OB and protection. Btw, I don't like tracking- not enough action and bores me to tears.

I am curious though, does anyone switch sports with the same dog after they have accomplished what they want in the 1st?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Sally, if I were training with Jerry and crew I would have absolutely no hesitation in putting my faith in their answers. 
One problem I see is that training at different clubs isn't the best idea with an inexperienced handler. Different techniques/methods can confuse both you and the dog. Ideally you have to know a bit about what's going on in the training field as supposed to just doing it.
Training in different formats (sch/ring/whatever) is best for an inexperienced person if the different training was done by one trainer/club.
Even with something as simple as cross training in AKC obedience requires you to be able to see conflicts in training. 
JMHO course! :wink:


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

I want a "thinking" dog rather than a pattern. The key to crosstraining is KNOW THE RULES of your chosen sports/venues, and develop strong foundation training. You can lay foundation for multiple sport at one time. Find the common ground.

Unless I am very familiar with the sport/venue, I would go to a trainer that has cross trained and titled. They'll know the rules and how to get it done.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Good points Anne. I like the thinker dogs too. 

Bob, I totally trust Jerry and co, and hope this question didn't imply me questioning them. Jerry is like Mr Myagi and I am a more feminine Danielson! I'm sure you know there is no official Sch club here anymore, and with so many training interests and directions one can go, it is hard for me to be consistent with just one thing. Maybe I should just go for making him "an executive security dog"! Laugh laugh!


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Sally Crunkleton said:


> Maren, thanks for sharing. That does sound like way too much too soon. I am curious how old your dog was, or what foundation had been set before the merry-go-round of decoys began?


No problem. I have talked about his history at length before, mostly here:

http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f13/too-worried-about-handlers-presence-bite-23202/

But reader's digest version: he's a pretty genetically strong dog (both parents titled to or earned FR3), but didn't start him on any bitework as a puppy or young dog until he was 3 years old (April 2010). Had a couple of really excellent guys working on his foundation and he was doing well for not having any foundation as a young dog. Then both of them moved away within a 6 month period, so then this whole thing just kinda went south. Jay has worked my dog once before last spring when I was visiting and I'm pretty sure I briefly met you as well at some point (Jerry probably introduced you as his wife :wink, though I won't say anything bad about Jay or Jerry. They do good work. But as I live 14 hours from Augusta, that doesn't help much. 

The last 3 months, we've been working with the same decoy and he's improved tremendously being on a good training decoy instead of having to bounce around. Sucks that he lives 4 hours away, but if that's what you gotta do, that's what you gotta do. Hoping we'll get some good results soon. [-o<


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Sally Crunkleton said:


> Good points Anne. I like the thinker dogs too.
> 
> Bob, I totally trust Jerry and co, and hope this question didn't imply me questioning them. Jerry is like Mr Myagi and I am a more feminine Danielson! I'm sure you know there is no official Sch club here anymore, and with so many training interests and directions one can go, it is hard for me to be consistent with just one thing. Maybe I should just go for making him "an executive security dog"! Laugh laugh!



Completely understood! 

p.s.
If Mya.....errrr...Jerry starts talking about waxing his car or painting his fence......run! 
I never went for that part of the movie. :lol:


----------



## Tiago Fontes (Apr 17, 2011)

So, what is the problem again? lol


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

No problem Tiago, just getting information and wanted shared experiences.

Bob- your right.....paint and wax aren't my thing.

Maren, if you were at the gathering, I probably was introduced as his wife, little joke he plays on new people. 14 hrs is a haul, but I think 4 is too- but your right, gotta do what you gotta do.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Joby Becker said:


> great post...I agree...


double agree. All of the foundation needs to be done in one setting. But there comes a time when you and your dog need to take field trips to see new places and new decoys. The dogs that are so strong that don't care who they are going to bite or where they are at are rare, most others you have to show them adversity and show them they can overcome it. The dog should step out onto that field thinking they are the baddest thing that's ever been on that field.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Brett Bowen said:


> double agree. All of the foundation needs to be done in one setting. But there comes a time when you and your dog need to take field trips to see new places and new decoys. The dogs that are so strong that don't care who they are going to bite or where they are at are rare, most others you have to show them adversity and show them they can overcome it. *The dog should step out onto that field thinking they are the baddest thing that's ever been on that field*.


The dog should step out of the house thinking that


----------



## Marta Wajngarten (Jul 30, 2006)

The exposure the dog gets from going to different training places is good BUT the training needs to be consistent and majority of times different clubs have different ways of training things, even different decoys can have very different ways of interacting with the dog. You're running the risk of screwing up your training through that inconsistency plus the dog being new to the decoy they're relying on you to relay where the dog is at in training and what you want them to do with him and if you can't reliably do that you're only adding to the problem by painting an inaccurate picture of your dog to the new decoy. 

I hate it when guys try to test other people's dogs in "real life" scenarios. Especially with a young dog with no proper training for that sort of thing. Some dogs get through it fine but for some it can be a total disaster and can set you back tons exactly like what happened with your guy. How would you like it if some one plucked you out and dropped you right smack in the middle of a battle field for an hour just to see what you will do? Do you think you would sleep well that night? These "real life" experiences can be extremely stressful and cause long term damages to dogs not ready for that level of stress (young dogs especially).


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Marta Wajngarten said:


> I hate it when guys try to test other people's dogs in "real life" scenarios. Especially with a young dog with no proper training for that sort of thing. Some dogs get through it fine but for some it can be a total disaster and can set you back tons exactly like what happened with your guy. How would you like it if some one plucked you out and dropped you right smack in the middle of a battle field for an hour just to see what you will do? Do you think you would sleep well that night? These "real life" experiences can be extremely stressful and cause long term damages to dogs not ready for that level of stress (young dogs especially).


What kind of real-life scenarios are you talking about? just curious


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

I cross train a lot, and IMO it can be very good for a dog, when done properly. But it can also blow a dog up if not done properly, especially a young dog. How much of a negative it can be for any one program really depends on how you do it. For example if you are doing IPO, and you decided to do a building search, don't let the dogs bark and hold go to crap just because you are in a building. But beyond that, I think the more experiences a young dog has, the better, even if you only plan to ever trial in one sport. Which dog do you think will handle something like a tarp coming loose from an ez-up and flying across the field in the middle of their routine, or a bunch of papers flying off the secretaries desk, etc? The dog who has never worked on anything but a perfectly pristine trial like field, or the dog who has gone off the field and done bitework in the bushes, the porta-potty, a storage shed, etc.

With a young dog I think some element of familiarity is important when cross training. This means if you are going to introduce new skills, new environments, etc try to do it with a decoy the dog already knows. This gives the young dog a level of comfort, and also means he/she is working on a decoy who knows them, and if the dog starts to show some issues will recognize it and be able to react accordingly.

If you are going to introduce the dog to a new decoy, do it using execises/environments the dog is already familiar with.

Later in life, when you've done this many times and the dog is mature and experienced, you can do the "let's see what happens if ..." type stuff.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> The dog who has never worked on anything but a perfectly pristine trial like field, or the dog who has gone off the field and done bitework in the bushes, *the porta-potty,* a storage shed, etc.


Kadi, I'm afraid we're going to have to see video of this. :-o :lol:


----------



## Tiago Fontes (Apr 17, 2011)

Sally Crunkleton said:


> No problem Tiago, just getting information and wanted shared experiences.
> 
> Bob- your right.....paint and wax aren't my thing.
> 
> Maren, if you were at the gathering, I probably was introduced as his wife, little joke he plays on new people. 14 hrs is a haul, but I think 4 is too- but your right, gotta do what you gotta do.


 
Was just joking. 


Regards


----------



## Sally Crunkleton (Jan 13, 2012)

Thanks everyone for the feedback. My dog has only been exposed to 2 decoys and only 1 of them on a more consistent basis....and not nearly enough yet for me to mix it up just yet if I am being fair to him. He is probably more confident than I! Lol! In fact, it did make me feel better when I was recently told there was nothing nervy about my dog, so now it may be ok to add a little pressure.

Great insight and advice. I see the general consensus is strong foundation, then yes it can be good to mix things up- if I am clear on what I do and don't want (which I am pretty good at being clear when it comes to my dog).

I have him do odd things already, just not where a decoy is involved. I do not have a specific sport "club" locally, but am fortunate to have very knowledgeable people from different arenas to train with...it's just more confusing for me to see lots of different training scenarios vs seeing everyone training for the same goal. It could make me a jack of all trades, but a master at none 

Oh- Tiago, I knew you were kidding


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> Kadi, I'm afraid we're going to have to see video of this. :-o :lol:


LOL It's probably not as exciting as it sounds. Generally it's just a decoy standing up on the toliet area, with the lid down, so the dog has to come into a confined space for the bite, then lots of banging and slamming going on while on the bite, slamming of the door, beating on the walls, etc.

Not much different then a small shed, just that a few of the fields I've trained on have had port-a-potties but not sheds.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> LOL It's probably not as exciting as it sounds. Generally it's just a decoy standing up on the toliet area, with the lid down, so the dog has to come into a confined space for the bite, then lots of banging and slamming going on while on the bite, slamming of the door, beating on the walls, etc.
> 
> Not much different then a small shed, just that a few of the fields I've trained on have had port-a-potties but not sheds.


That was kind a let down :lol:




It the portapotty empty? Ever had one tip over?


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Anne Vaini said:


> That was kind a let down :lol:


 LOL



Anne Vaini said:


> It the portapotty empty? Ever had one tip over?


No and No


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I was thinkin it had to be a pretty small mali type, to fit down the hole into the bottom of the porta-potty


----------

