I think treat training is cruel. - Page 37

The down is not always or mostly perceived by a pup as a submissive position, especially if shaped by food/positive reinforcement. I would think a pup is more likely to perceive the down as a submissive position from teaching the behavior via negative reinforcement where you are actually forcing the pup to submit in order to remove the downward pressure on the leash when the pup doesn't even understand what you are asking him to do.  It is illogical to think positive reinforcement with marker training contributes to handler aggression.  There are no corrections for the dog to become aggressive toward the handler.

At six months old I taught my dog, Body, to down in about ten seconds using a go at the decoy as a reward.

He would his the ground in pheonix position toe nails dug into the ground and his focus burning a hole in the decoy.
Upon release command, he would throw grass divits in my direction and hit the decoy like a freight train.


Forever in his life his down was executed with energy and spirit.
All my dogs I train the down with motivation...mutch faster results than the Koehler method I used to use...thank you sch for the enlightenment.

No training method is ideal for all types of dogs....anyone that thinks that has trained limited types of dogs or has working knowledge of limited types of training.
A good trainer will utilize what in tool chest is best option....I have run into many dogs over the years with negligible food drive for treats or high value food.....but other tools have stilled proved successful.
My point is simply that you marry the dog to best technique that brings on success....and that can be limited by the dog, or it can be limited by the knowledge of the trainer.

Gustav, well put. As it has been said, dogs tend to do things that bring them pleasure, and avoid things that bring them discomfort. As a trainer, the key is to find out what brings that dog pleasure or discomfort and use it to establish desired behaviors.

@Apple dogs are not as stupid as you think. When you push down they understand that you want them to go down.

Apple: It is illogical to think positive reinforcement with marker training contributes to handler aggression. There are no corrections for the dog to become aggressive toward the handler.

Hans: Illogical? You must be joking right? So you think that corrections or better yet, only corrections contribute handler aggression? Do you understand the importance of establishing leadership position asap. Do you understand that you can make only 1x first impression and create default?

and that Gustav, is the biggest problem I have with some people who go to seminairs and think they can copy any system 1 on 1 to their own dog, without realizing that many seminair givers select their dog, 1 from a thousand with the right balance of drives etc to fit their training

you got to learn to read your dog, and be able to respond to various reactions your dog , for sure, will give you, and continue differently on different responses, that goes for all trainingsystems from trainers, or systems like MT

for all I care Marker training is a new name for an old system, as a kick with a booth after unwanted behaviour is a "marker "as well

rewarding wanted behaviour is not new, and linking consequences to certain behaviours, good and/or bad and expect certain respons from dog is nothing more than simple pavlov

furthermore, I truly believe that the fastest way to make a dog understand, is using both positive and negative from day one in the learning process, for sure the level of negative is of greater importance than the level of positive, as you cannot do much damage there

 

 

 

Joan ro it seems that you yet again did not grasp what I am saying. Can you please tell us what is "down motivation"?
.

If the response of the dog to commands given would be the only reason for training then + methods would be peachy ducky.
However obedience training for working and family dogs is not just about teaching commands, that is where most trainers and especially + trainers are lacking understanding.
I get from Europe superbly well trained and titled dogs. So they know commands better than most. Some of them are world class competitors. Yet these dogs are often what I call "social idiots" with 0 social skills. Oh yes, they do great on the competition field mainly when in drive, but in everyday life they are handicapped.
That alone is a proof that training obedience needs to do more than teach sit, down, stay, come, heel.....The teaching of these commands gives us an opportunity to be more than teaching the dog to perform circus tricks. The method of obedience training used will determine how well the dog will fit into society.
The dog who does not acquire in the very young age permanent default that his handler is his leader, will invariably have problems.
It is true that dog can acquire this default by other ways then obedience training but in my experience obedience for every day life is the best way to pass on the dog such understanding.
If trainers and new dog owners would take this to their hearts then we would have much fewer dogs in dog pounds.

Seminars:

If someone understands "Why you do what you do" you can absolutely learn from watching people work their dogs at Seminars. But if you don't understand the "Why" behind the work, it's wasted money.

 

Personally, I can sit there and watch someone work their dog and pull the information right out and implement it myself because I've got the gift of understanding the "Why". It's how I learn and then I tweak it a little.

That being said, those that give Seminars either have the gift of teaching or they don't. Just because you are a world level handler doesn't mean you can actually teach...

Duke, you talk like real dog man. I can hear from your words a theoretical knowledge as well as a practical experience with many dogs.