I think treat training is cruel. - Page 39

About the teaching the “forced sit”:

Even if you, as Prager writes, “gently” push down on the hind end...WHY? Why bother doing this? Not to mention, his delicate hip area as a pup when joints are developing.

Why this is not needed....

Does a puppy not sit naturally? Is ‘sitting’ not already intrinsic to what a dog does?

As is laying down, barking, walking, looking at things...etc...

Why not just reinforce the pups natural sit, when your pup is 7–8 weeks old, first day you get puppy?

Puppy sits, ‘cause he is tired of standing...You mark the behavior “yes” as soon as his butt is down....reinforce within a second (usually with food at this stage because healthy pups are usually endless food machines). Add cue...start intermittent reinforcements...stop reinforcements.

Finished.

Teaching a forced sit to show dominance. I really am laughing.
 

Jesse, what is wrong with "forced" approach in training?

 

Valk-
I have one word. Why? Why use force in the teaching stage?

If you use force in the teaching stage...what will you get?
You’ll get a dog used to force.

Where to do you go from there, should the sh$% really hit the fan? You have no place to go except escalation.

"We don't want to put the obedience into the dog, we want to bring it out of the dog."

as long, as "forced" do not inflict the pain, i'm ok. with it.
what do i gain? i see ability or lack of such in pup/dog to handle pressure.

if mechanical pushing/lifting the pup/dog into sitz, platz or steh are enough to scare shit out of him,
then maybe the problem in dog/pup and not in the training method.

JJ same as in humans,we are creating weak children that cannot take any setback these days,

Being forceful in the teaching stage has nothing, zip, to do with creating strong dogs.

That is a total fallacy.

A dog is strong in temperament or not. Everything is on a sliding scale.

I am not talking about correctly tickling out defense, or teaching him to focus in defense, if that is what you are doing with a qualified dog, one that can take it ....with a much older puppy or young dog.

I am talking TEACHING a specific behavior or chain of behaviors. When teaching, no force is required.

Why, Valk, do the dogs sometimes start to rebell at one stage, like at 10 mo? Because one may have pushed the forced training too much.

Once your dog refuses, rebels, where do you go? A higher and higher stim?

You are on a crazy faster and faster moving treadmill when using force....and it will be hard to get off without damage.

Save the force for when it is needed. Not for teaching.

 

PS: I don’t consider using a whip, a stick, or banging plastic bottles together, or spooky man posture, or whatever other distractions are used and added to training, if the dog can handle it or recovers quickly, as force.

I agree that you do not normally need [any level of] 'forced' training with young puppies. Absolutely, JesseJ.

But then you say " Why (ValK) do dogs sometimes rebel...at 10 months? Because one may have pushed the forced training too much."
Seriously JJ, are you suggesting that 'teenage' dogs would never go through a rebellious stage if they have never been 'force' trained to do anything ? If not, if you accept that in fact some dogs will 'rebel' @ around ten months (maybe earlier, maybe later) even though they have been taught exclusively using positive, non-forced, methods, then perhaps you could enlighten us as to how to spot the difference in early training - assuming one has not been the only trainer all along, in which case I guess one would know where they went wrong.

HM_
I agree that you do not normally need [any level of] 'forced' training with young puppies. Absolutely, JesseJ.  
But then you say " Why (ValK) do dogs sometimes rebel...at 10 months? Because one may have pushed the forced training too much."
Seriously JJ, are you suggesting that 'teenage' dogs would never go through a rebellious stage if they have never been 'force' trained to do anything ? If not, if you accept that in fact some dogs will 'rebel' @ around ten months (maybe earlier, maybe later) even though they have been taught exclusively using positive, non-forced, methods, then perhaps you could enlighten us as to how to spot the difference in early training - assuming one has not been the only trainer all along, in which case I guess one would know where they went wrong.

Hi HM-
If I understand your comment correctly....Nope, I’m not at all saying that some dogs won’t go through the “normal” rebellion-teenage stage around that time, regardless of teaching method.

If the young dog goes all nutty, hormonal and rebellious....and knows what you have taught him earlier, yeah, correct him. But I will bet, your correction need not be as strong as if you have used a certain element of “force’ all along.

Same thing if you get a new adult dog...you might have to almost start all over with your training because you will not know how, or what, he was taught before. Same thing then applies to activity of daily life. ...You are in charge of all resources, just like in the puppy stage.
 

I’m referring to specifically to Valk’s comment many pages ago, that a dog (maybe his...not sure) is not complying at around 10mo anymore. This is only “as food for thought” about WHY the dog is not complying. Since according to his comments, he seems to use a lot of forced teaching. (Not training, but teaching). Again...just food for thought, since I don’t know Valk or his dog or his teaching method.

My point is only...use force sparingly, ...cause you have no place else to go once it escalates. You have a lot more leeway with a marker trained dog to escalate punishment if needed, than a dog that already has experienced a degree of force.

I hope I understood the question. I don’t mean to pontificate.