Positive Sport Training - Page 2

Its just as easy to ruin dogs with no compulsion and you cant get across some of the tougher ones without it. Look, I am all for training a behavior using food or a toy, whatever that dog likes, within reason, but, the fact remains that without compulsion, the dog will never be fully trained nor proofed.

Indeed, all those softer methods are being used because dogs have become softer and then they are used to breed to other soft dogs and produce more soft dogs. As far as the E collar, I have never found a better training tool that leaves me out of the equation when correcting and does not harm my relationship with my dog. 

HD, I agree and disagree.  I agree that people lie.  But I disagree that "You cannot train and proof a dog without compulsion", as it has been done by my trainer and others aswell. 

Vonrivera

Like I said Vonrivera, people lie, but, I am always open to learn, please, tell us how "your trainer and others have done it"?

Both have used +R methods on their dogs competing in schutzhund.  One has gotten a perfect score in Schh 1, her Schh 2, and a FR1.  The other has gotten her Schh 3 and FR2 all without compulsion.  It seems to me that one main reason people don't use +R methods is because of the incorrect popular thought that it takes more time.  To be honest, it really doesn't.  

Vonrivera

Vonrivera, that does not tell me anything about what I asked. Once again, people lie my friend, especially when they have something to sell, take care!

The difference between positive methods and using force, annoyance, or pain to train is that positive reinforcement does not lose effectiveness so long as the dog has trust in the trainer and the dog is treated fairly and consistently.  No matter how you use force or compulsion over time it loses effectiveness as a training tool.  Those who use too much compulsion, pain, or annoyance dimish the usefulness of positive reinforcement as the dog loses confidence and trust in their relationship with their trainer ( and all humans to some degree ) and over time the force, pain, or annoyance lose effectiveness as they become less effective as training tools because the dog needs more and more compulsion to get the same results.  Dogs need to understand that compulsion is an  option if they purposely disobey.  You can't wait to introduce a two year old dominant male to compulsion at two years otherwise you will be changing the rules too late in the game and you will have a fight on your hands but compulsion can become a blunt instrument if overused.  Once the dog starts worrying about getting a correction more than doing the trainers bidding then compulsion is counter productive.

Bubba, once a dog is trained and proofed, it has learned the concequences of its actions and no longer challenges the handler, if it was trained correctly, therefore there is no need for any more corrections, save for the occasional time.

Training goes on forever between the dog and closest human to that dog.  I ask people if they are training their dog and if they reply no then my response is that your dog is training you then,  Someone is always getting trained when a dog and human are interacting in close contact or living under the same roof.  Learning from the dogs is a good thing so long as you are aware of what the dog is communicating and I know that good two way communication is required to have a harmonious training situation with your dog.

Two different things Bubba. By the time my dog is 2, it knows full well all the behaviors I want it to know, all the obedience, all the whatever I need that dog to know. If I need to correct a 2 or 5 year old dog because its blowing a stay command at that age, my training and proofing was useless.

Yet at every BSP and BSZS it happens.  Javir Talka Marda bombed out in a regional contest I believe in tracking and later was BSP champion the same year.  It also happens that undoubtedly well trained and proofed dogs blow stays at the WUSV or fail to out.