Table Training theory and application. - Page 2

I have used it before....as a helper and a handler....quite relevant for those who understand:-) Newbies should find someone experienced.

Lots of good answers
                             I wonder why someone that is as experienced as Ed Frawley is totally against table training.

I suppose you would have to know Frawleys experience and a little about him.

It´s a tool, not more, not less...
For training a dog to its best you not only need to be a good handler, but you need to have a real good helper, too.
As soon as this is given it doesn´t matter what kind of training you use - everything always depends on the dog.
There are a lot of possibilities to ruin a dog, you don´t need a table to do so.

So do a majority of the SCH clubs now have them available...or is this the exception? Of course it is just a tool, but there are places you see it used far more than others....unless the SCH scene has changed dramatically in past few years.

It´s still the exception.
I don´t think there is a big difference between table training and the "old" method of tieing ( spelling ??? )  a dog to a post.
In both cases you need to know what you are doing.

my problem with the above videos as well as the table training i have seen, has more to do with the way the whole thing is
conducted than the use of the table itself.  the table is immaterial, as susie said, nothing but a tool.  i don't like any training
scenario that breaks the 1st cardinal rule:  the handler is the boss, the dog is the partner and the helper is the bad guy.
any time the bad guy is running the show---telling the boss & his partner what to do----its fucked up.  sorry, but the boss
and his partner need to be running the show.  if training theory has to be discussed, it should be done before the dog is
introduced to the helper.
pjp

Susie you bring up a good point that a bunch of us were talking about yesterday(police trainers)..... And that is the fact that back in the day a lot of stakeout work was done with young dogs....with handler there, but also without the handler there ....it built up the dogs confidence in using its drives confidently without the handler holding the leash. The table is often an extension of this for older adolescent dogs. There are far too many dogs today that have not learned to handle stress or work in drives without the handler's presence. This type of stakeout work for puppies used to be routine......I like to see a dog work foundationally very strongly without me, and then the work begins of bonding us into a team. Sometimes I work my dog on the table or in the box with me alongside, and sometimes I let the dog take on the challenge by their self .....depends on where we are and where we need to get.

gustav,   exactly.  if the work is going to be done as a team, then that is how it should be done.  if the work is to be done by the
dog alone, then the handler should be absent.  the dog should never have to work in the presences of his handler without the
benefit of working as a team.  in other words, the handler should never be an inert object.  we often talk about confusion in the
dog and clarity of the mind.  i cannot think of anything more confusing to a dog than to have the helper ordering the handler &
dog about.  the hierarchy is completely upset.  to keep the dog clear, the handler needs to be the boss or if he can't, then he
needs to be out of the picture.  the helper needs to remain the bad guy.  anytime the helper becomes the handler, it creates
confusion in the dog. 
pjp

It really depends on the situation, the dog, the handler and what you are trying to achieve.