I think treat training is cruel. - Page 36

Jesse~ do you really think that anyone here doesn’t know the basics of MT!
🤔 smh ,,,

I think the more appropriate conclusion is that not everyone views MT the same as you might, which is ok the last I looked.

You made your point about your thoughts on MT and others have as well, but to reiterate the same comments over and over do nothing but take up space and make for too much reading imo! 

What more could possibly be said, about what’s already been said, except the “digs” that are going to get this thread locked down .,,,

That’s not your “inner Carnac” it’s common sense and the last post on page 35 telling you that.😬

 

Prager-
No, that is incorrect...again.

I said from the beginning of this post....the teaching of a new behavior with MT is fun, no stress, and painless, with no confrontation.

The Proofing phase...that is a different thing all together. Then if you KNOW the dog knows what he has to do, and the dog does not comply, well, then comes correction time with whatever method you deem necessary. But only once the dog knows the cue reliably but refuses to comply. BTW, at this point, one long ago gave up using, or needing , treats or toys.

Stop twisting other peoples words - or taking them out of context.

Ruger-
Listen Ruger....Marker Training is Marker Training....there are not 100 different versions of it...nor is it opened to just any old interpretation.

It is what it is.
If you do not know that, then you don’t know marker training.

And, if people want this forum to be filled with inaccuracies, then so be it.

I am NOT talking about opinions. Marker Training is a system with accepted standards.

BTW the last post on 35 came after my comment.

Prager says:
”which clicking ( as described by JJ) does not, then such dog with even minimal streak of dominance will assume a leadership position and then often does become overly protective or handler aggressive. Such dog quite often ends up dead euthanized which is the ultimate cruelty of treat + training.”

PS Prager - I dont use a clicker- I’m talking MT.
 

Let me claim another thing while I’m at it.

I would bet that many otherwise ‘sound’ dogs that are so called ‘tough’, ‘hard’, ‘dominant’ or ‘aggressive’ are so because of bad and unfair handling. Sure, some people like their dogs that way and probably train them to be that way. But for others...they are a liability and a pain in the a$$.

All to often it has to do with unfair training, over-the-top training, too-much-too-soon training, bad handlers, novice handlers...and sometimes too many handlers at once, ruining the dog.

If correct maker training were used consistantly, THAT would save dogs lives. Not Pragers “Treats are cruel theory” and putting MT into that same basket, as he writes.

MT followed with correct proofing in all conditions and environments, with corrections used fairly once the dog knows the cue....using prongs, or slips if needed (often they are) and even ecollars used CORRECTLY (not just to fry the dog)...for some cases....

Then you would have a lot less handler aggression or other aggression.

And THAT, would save some so-called over-dominant dogs lives.

Sport titles are mandatory in Czech republic before any dog can be bred. Many people are advocating such rules should be used in the USA. I don't agree wi h that, but I do believe that all gsd breeders should be capable of training and titling two or three dogs ....just so they get an appreciation for what goes into the training and titlng and so they can better evaluate what type of temperament a dog has when it comes to intense training for the three phases.
Simply training for pp does not give a whole picture of a dog's mettle.

MT is imperative for successful sch training in all three parts. I'm not talking about " clicker" training, but Marker Training that uses bite reward, for example, for proper heeling.

I don't use sport as a measure of all things, as pragre claimed that I do ( how he comes to that conclusion beats the heck out of me)
But I have a profound appreciation for sch, having trained and titled three of my own dogs that I raised from puppies.
I used MT even when I taught running blinds, and teaching the transports, (both for side and back transports), etc.

Jesse~ Here we go again lol more of the same, lol 😴

You clearly don’t want to read what’s written.
I said nothing to warrant that response.

And just as an fyi the forum was filled with inaccuracies long before you and will be long after you’re gone! You’ll have to find peace with that or lose your hair! 😆😮~

I’m sending you a Pm please check your inbox.

Jesse:
I would bet that many otherwise ‘sound’ dogs that are so called ‘tough’, ‘hard’, ‘dominant’ or ‘aggressive’ are so because of bad and unfair handling. Sure, some people like their dogs that way and probably train them to be that way. But for others...they are a liability and a pain in the a$$.

dominant type of dogs are liability and need proficient handling, no doubt about.
but that become absolutely irresponsible stupidity, when people does taught their dogs to acts in such way, when those dogs in fact isn't predisposed to such role by their innate base.
artificial (fake) enhancement of such trait on practical level is useless (this won't make dog better) but could brings lot of bad consequences.
dog should be used in area of that particular dog's suitability, not beyond it.

Joan:
Sport titles are mandatory in Czech republic before any dog can be bred. Many people are advocating such rules should be used in the USA. I don't agree wi h that, but I do believe that all gsd breeders should be capable of training and titling two or three dogs ....just so they get an appreciation for what goes into the training and titlng and so they can better evaluate what type of temperament a dog has when it comes to intense training for the three phases. 

SV does obligate its members to title their dogs before breeding as well. does that has significant impact on quality?
i doubt commercial regulator, who depends on flow of fees, can be really demanding.
it's all hinge on breeders, who in turn depend on market demand.

titling the dogs for most part done just to promote the sales and justify the price.

    My problem with all non-stress, non-pressure joyous obedience training being it clicker or MT in general, during learning fazes is that the dog is not establishing a leadership position during a time where it is the most important. As I have said before the "critical period" of imprinting expires quite soon and we can make only one first impression which then leads to what I call default. The defaults can be established at any age but best defaults are established early. ( Default is: what the dog learns first he likes the best does the most and reverts to when under adequate stress.) 

That is why it is important to establish leadership position asap and time to use for  "Joyous, non- stress, non-pressure" MT is wasted on such effort. 

 My favorite example is "down!" training. IMO Down training if trained  by using negative reinforcement is the best way to establish a leadership position. ( Negative reinforcement = taking something away when the dog complies) . That is done by after command Down! is given applying steady gentle but firm pressure downwards on the leash. This pressure is immediately relieved as soon the pup decides to go down. This is important because Down! is a submissive position and to make the pup to make the decision to submit and go down is an extremally important way to establish a leadership position default. Such an opportunity is missed when positive MT is applied. This particular point is extremally important because I have seen 100s of dogs trained down via positive reinforcement type marker training way and other obedience commands as well and the handler did not establish leadership position AT THAT TIME and dog assumed leadership position and in many cases became overly protective or handler aggressive. 

 This may not be an issue in happy go lucky labrador retriever but it is a very important issue in working type dogs suitable for  PP/LE work.  

Vaulk, I'm talking about benefit of experience of training a dog to title. Not talking about the poltical side you keep harping on. According to your agenda, all breeders should be devoid of knowledge of training for title...

Sch is not as easy to train for, breeders who have never accomplished training and titling a dog in sch use the cop out that it's just an SV thing, that it's just dumb sport. Fine. But it shows their lack of training knowledge, ability.....and they always knock it because they can't achieve it.

JJ and you are talking about twisting words? And yet you say :I would bet that many otherwise ‘sound’ dogs that are so called ‘tough’, ‘hard’, ‘dominant’ or ‘aggressive’ are so because of bad and unfair handling. Sure, some people like their dogs that way and probably train them to be that way. But for others...they are a liability and a pain in the a$$. All to often it has to do with unfair training, over-the-top training, too-much-too-soon training, bad handlers, novice handlers...and sometimes too many handlers at once, ruining the dog.

And you say that to  this sentence: Prager says:
”which clicking ( as described by JJ) does not, then such dog with even minimal streak of dominance will assume a leadership position and then often does become overly protective or handler aggressive. Such dog quite often ends up dead euthanized which is the ultimate cruelty of treat + training.”

 well, I would think that anyone could tell that I am quite obviously talking about genetic dominance yet you twist it into unfair training?  Are you equating dominant dogs with liability and pain in the a$$. Well, maybe it is because your type of MT training does not allow the dog to understand that the trainer is in a leadership position. This may be good for genetically submissive Golden retriever in local pet store training class, but it will not work on mentally strong GSD. That is exactly what I am talking in the post above. This type of positive MT training of basic obedience is a culprit to future problems stemming from dogs not thinking that their handler is not in leadership psoition. Later tries for the establishment of leadership positions are often not successful because in genetically dominant type dogs the default (the first impression) has been already established and it is not that the handler is a leader. it is that the handler its a Pez dispenser of treats for tricks . ..... it is so very sad to see all the positive joyous training fanatics with clickers or other positive only MT methods missing the opportunity to establish a leadership position early in the life of the pup during basic obedience where it counts and where the defaults can be easily established.  And then they make unsavory comments about unfair or bad training. Give me a physical break!  Theirs is the bad and unfair training!!!!. Why!? Well, I have spent decades fixing their well-intentioned but misguided touchy-feely training leading to hell. And all that while calling  +/_ training as an Old School and obsolete and other horse puckey. This really chaps my hide. This is a training from joyous training to disaster dogs.