This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Slamdunc on 16 February 2013 - 22:02
Hans,
Thanks for pointing out a few things that I should clarify:
Jim your approach:
If I could not physically catch the dog, the field was to large or the dog is too fast and I'm to slow then I may tell the dog "down." Before I do this, I will look at the dog and read it's body language. If I get the feeling the dog may not recall, I won't call it I will tell it "down" and stay. I will approach the dog and praise and pet and reward the dog for the down. If I do call the dog and it ignores me, my voice will change and I will order "down." I will then go to the dog, bite my tongue find my happy place on the walk over and praise and pet the dog for downing correctly.
Yes that is what you read in some text books and it seems to be the proper choice
but the problem with this approach is:
. Yes you rewarded the dog for down, but you did not communicate to the dog negative for not comming.
No, I did not recall the dog if I believed it would not come; therefore the dog was not disobedient. If I sense the dog may ignore me or choose not to recall I will not call the dog. I do not like to give commands to a dog that I feel will not be obeyed. When I give a command I almost always have a means of enforcing that command immediately and means of rewarding for obeying. I do not repeat commands, if a dog understands a command it has two seconds to perform that command. More than two seconds is unacceptable for most commands, 1 1/2 seconds is much more acceptable. If the dog understands a Command and chooses not to perform that command then I must make the dog perform the behavior immediately. If the dog does perform the command correctly then I must praise and reward the dog immediately.
If the dog is out in my yard, for example in the back by the pool and is "fence fighting" with the neighbor's dogs and ignores the recall command I will go and physically get the dog and there will be a stern admonishment. There will be no "down" command, there will be one recall command and I'm sure several assorted negative markers which I do not need to post here.
I will spend more time on the recall and the ante will be raised, the praise, reward and correction will also be raised. To be even more clear, if the dog does not recall because he is a dog aggressive ass and prefers fence fighting, the dog will be set up and proofed. This will occur as soon as my blood pressure goes down and I find that happy place. I will have the means and ability to correct the dog and ensure that the recall is fast and attentive in the midst of great distraction. There are several ways to do this and it will ensure that the dog leaves the fence and returns to me immediately. I will also be prepared to reward the dog on a high level for complying.
There is no bad "proposition" here. The dog is rarely given the opportunity to ignore a command and given commands that he will obey. When that happens he is rewarded by the most "Benevolent Dictator" in the world. My approach to the dog when he is correct is always welcoming and rewarded. When the dog ignores commands that he clearly understands he is punished, swiftly and firmly. There are no grey areas, only black and white. I never give a dog a command that I feel he will not obey if I do not have the means and ability to immediately enforce it. I don't say "sit, sit sit" or "here, No, Come, NINE, Here!" I do not say "Aus, out, NINE aus, AUS, AUS!" I do not believe in teaching dogs to count. I believe in "Plan A and Plan B." In Plan A everything goes perfectly and the dog is rewarded, Plan B is everything did not go perfectly and now I can immediately enforce then reward. It is very simple and not rocket science.
Hans you said:
Jim: I for one, do not judge a dog or handler based on equipment used but on results.
That is a scary thought!!!!! I think know what you mean and I hope that you have misspoken, but you should choose your words more wisely.
Again: I do not agree with Machiavelli and firmly believe that end results do not justify the means.
Hans, the results that I look for and want to achieve for myself and my unit are:
Well trained dogs and handlers that love their work. I want dogs that are happy and high in drive in work. I do not want handler sensitive dogs or over bearing handlers that put too much pressure on their dogs. I want dogs that enjoy working with their handlers and are clear headed enough to work independently and effectively. I want dogs that push to work, can contain themselves and can function well in all of the areas that we train. I expect a lot from our dogs and our handlers. I do not care if a handler uses a slip collar, a prong collar, a flat leather collar, an E collar or a harness as long as he uses the collar effectively, properly and humanely. I use an E collar and we have several brand new ones in our supply room, I do not make any one else use them or any other training device. They can use what they like are comfortable with and works best for their dog. That is the bottom line. They choose the tools that give them the best results with their dog. When I said I do not judge a dog or handler based on the equipment used, I meant I do not force them to use the same tools that I use but I expect the same results. I will endeavor to choose my words more wisely, thank you!
Thanks for pointing out a few things that I should clarify:
Jim your approach:
If I could not physically catch the dog, the field was to large or the dog is too fast and I'm to slow then I may tell the dog "down." Before I do this, I will look at the dog and read it's body language. If I get the feeling the dog may not recall, I won't call it I will tell it "down" and stay. I will approach the dog and praise and pet and reward the dog for the down. If I do call the dog and it ignores me, my voice will change and I will order "down." I will then go to the dog, bite my tongue find my happy place on the walk over and praise and pet the dog for downing correctly.
Yes that is what you read in some text books and it seems to be the proper choice
but the problem with this approach is:
. Yes you rewarded the dog for down, but you did not communicate to the dog negative for not comming.
No, I did not recall the dog if I believed it would not come; therefore the dog was not disobedient. If I sense the dog may ignore me or choose not to recall I will not call the dog. I do not like to give commands to a dog that I feel will not be obeyed. When I give a command I almost always have a means of enforcing that command immediately and means of rewarding for obeying. I do not repeat commands, if a dog understands a command it has two seconds to perform that command. More than two seconds is unacceptable for most commands, 1 1/2 seconds is much more acceptable. If the dog understands a Command and chooses not to perform that command then I must make the dog perform the behavior immediately. If the dog does perform the command correctly then I must praise and reward the dog immediately.
If the dog is out in my yard, for example in the back by the pool and is "fence fighting" with the neighbor's dogs and ignores the recall command I will go and physically get the dog and there will be a stern admonishment. There will be no "down" command, there will be one recall command and I'm sure several assorted negative markers which I do not need to post here.
I will spend more time on the recall and the ante will be raised, the praise, reward and correction will also be raised. To be even more clear, if the dog does not recall because he is a dog aggressive ass and prefers fence fighting, the dog will be set up and proofed. This will occur as soon as my blood pressure goes down and I find that happy place. I will have the means and ability to correct the dog and ensure that the recall is fast and attentive in the midst of great distraction. There are several ways to do this and it will ensure that the dog leaves the fence and returns to me immediately. I will also be prepared to reward the dog on a high level for complying.
There is no bad "proposition" here. The dog is rarely given the opportunity to ignore a command and given commands that he will obey. When that happens he is rewarded by the most "Benevolent Dictator" in the world. My approach to the dog when he is correct is always welcoming and rewarded. When the dog ignores commands that he clearly understands he is punished, swiftly and firmly. There are no grey areas, only black and white. I never give a dog a command that I feel he will not obey if I do not have the means and ability to immediately enforce it. I don't say "sit, sit sit" or "here, No, Come, NINE, Here!" I do not say "Aus, out, NINE aus, AUS, AUS!" I do not believe in teaching dogs to count. I believe in "Plan A and Plan B." In Plan A everything goes perfectly and the dog is rewarded, Plan B is everything did not go perfectly and now I can immediately enforce then reward. It is very simple and not rocket science.
Hans you said:
Jim: I for one, do not judge a dog or handler based on equipment used but on results.
That is a scary thought!!!!! I think know what you mean and I hope that you have misspoken, but you should choose your words more wisely.
Again: I do not agree with Machiavelli and firmly believe that end results do not justify the means.
Hans, the results that I look for and want to achieve for myself and my unit are:
Well trained dogs and handlers that love their work. I want dogs that are happy and high in drive in work. I do not want handler sensitive dogs or over bearing handlers that put too much pressure on their dogs. I want dogs that enjoy working with their handlers and are clear headed enough to work independently and effectively. I want dogs that push to work, can contain themselves and can function well in all of the areas that we train. I expect a lot from our dogs and our handlers. I do not care if a handler uses a slip collar, a prong collar, a flat leather collar, an E collar or a harness as long as he uses the collar effectively, properly and humanely. I use an E collar and we have several brand new ones in our supply room, I do not make any one else use them or any other training device. They can use what they like are comfortable with and works best for their dog. That is the bottom line. They choose the tools that give them the best results with their dog. When I said I do not judge a dog or handler based on the equipment used, I meant I do not force them to use the same tools that I use but I expect the same results. I will endeavor to choose my words more wisely, thank you!
by Nans gsd on 17 February 2013 - 01:02
So the message I am getting from Slamdunc is ALWAYS set your dog up for success. That is my understanding of Slam's posts thus far which is what my trainer always tried to teach me that way of thinking also. Sometimes though, it does not work if it is not thought out first before giving a command, and I do find myself doing that; giving the command and wanting to give the reward but not being able to reinforce the command properly if not followed through correctly by the dog. Shit, not good. I need to rethink my training methods also no matter what the problem is or what command was given, be ready with reward no matter what collar you are training on or what the situation is. Man, I have homework to do. Great days everyone.
At Slamdunc, thank you again for all that you share with us. Invaluable. :D). My dog thanks you also. Nan
At Slamdunc, thank you again for all that you share with us. Invaluable. :D). My dog thanks you also. Nan
by Christopher Smith on 17 February 2013 - 03:02
Plenty of dogs are trained without e-collars with good results, for service or different type of sports, I would be very surprised if all those people who says they train without e-collars are lying and do different when no one can see. If mario does or not I don´t know, but as he says in the article, the e-collar is only a minor part and on low current, so why would it be so surprising if a good trainer can do well without an e-collar?
Using the e-collar is using the e-collar. Saying that someone only uses the collar "a lil bit" is on par with a woman being "a lil bit" pregnant.
And who are these top handlers that are not using the e-collar? Give me the names of a few people on the podium at championships that don't use e-collars.
by Prager on 17 February 2013 - 07:02
Slamdunc: No, I did not recall the dog if I believed it would not come; therefore the dog was not disobedient.
"If" is the operant word. You can not predict if the dog will response 100% of the time. But in any case you'r talking about training the dog to come where you can set the dog for success and I am talking about real scenario what I have described as a "user faze" or "working faze" where the dog disobeys while away from you in a distance where we do not always have the luxury to set the dog to succeed.
I know how to train dog to come and I described it and it is a good approach with which even you agree until I have mentioned that in user stage ( in every day life) the dog disobey while away from the handler. Thus at this point the topic - the question we are talking about is what do you do when the dog is working 300 ft away and disobey to come. In that case I use negative NO-down using deeper stern voice then normal, which is different from non negative or let's call it positive DOWN delivered with positive voice and attitude. You said that you may chase and get the the dog and then correct him. I have then in my last post explained why trying to chase and "get" the dog is a really bad idea. At least I believe so.
The fact of the matter is that for this scenario many people use e collar. I do not. I use negative NO - Down. You do not agree with that approach, because you are not differentiating negative No DOWN and Positive DOWN and believe that it is the same thing. I believe that they are completely different thing. This discussion turned quite civilized, thus I would urge you in a most friendly way to think about what I am saying about marking improper behavior with negative NO-DOWN delivered with negative attitude and consider it. In any case what I am concerned about in this discussion is clarity of what I am saying instead of trying to convince anybody of anything. That must be done by people who are reading these explanations themselves based on explanation presented.
Prager Hans
"If" is the operant word. You can not predict if the dog will response 100% of the time. But in any case you'r talking about training the dog to come where you can set the dog for success and I am talking about real scenario what I have described as a "user faze" or "working faze" where the dog disobeys while away from you in a distance where we do not always have the luxury to set the dog to succeed.
I know how to train dog to come and I described it and it is a good approach with which even you agree until I have mentioned that in user stage ( in every day life) the dog disobey while away from the handler. Thus at this point the topic - the question we are talking about is what do you do when the dog is working 300 ft away and disobey to come. In that case I use negative NO-down using deeper stern voice then normal, which is different from non negative or let's call it positive DOWN delivered with positive voice and attitude. You said that you may chase and get the the dog and then correct him. I have then in my last post explained why trying to chase and "get" the dog is a really bad idea. At least I believe so.
The fact of the matter is that for this scenario many people use e collar. I do not. I use negative NO - Down. You do not agree with that approach, because you are not differentiating negative No DOWN and Positive DOWN and believe that it is the same thing. I believe that they are completely different thing. This discussion turned quite civilized, thus I would urge you in a most friendly way to think about what I am saying about marking improper behavior with negative NO-DOWN delivered with negative attitude and consider it. In any case what I am concerned about in this discussion is clarity of what I am saying instead of trying to convince anybody of anything. That must be done by people who are reading these explanations themselves based on explanation presented.
Prager Hans
by Prager on 17 February 2013 - 07:02
Christopher Smith I personally believe that it is a fact that in order to win in competitions top places people are forced to use e collars.. To answer your questions I would say that all trainers before e collars came on market were training dogs without e collars and ended on podiums. However competitions are not the only training around and who is on podium and who is not is not what is important in life. There are other things. Like having fun with the dog in the back yard.
Saphira z AlpineK9 . No e colar ever .
Prager Hans
Saphira z AlpineK9 . No e colar ever .
Prager Hans
by Slamdunc on 17 February 2013 - 13:02
Hans,
I use negative markers and positive markers. The issue I have with your approach is correcting the dog for the down which the dog did correctly. IMO, the moment to correct for not coming was missed and it happens. Not coming when called in your example was disobedience, the down which happens moments later is obedience and I do not correct for obedience.
Trust me not everything I do is positive, compulsion is a necessary part of dog training. I imprint behaviors with young dogs, I teach a good foundation motivationally and when the dog is reliable and understands the commands I proof. Proofing involves higher levels of distractions and higher levels of drives combined with higher rewards for obedience and corrections for disobedience. I will "set" the dog up with distractions and give a command, Hier or come in this example. If the dog recalls I praise and reward as if the dog came back to me with the winning power ball lottery ticket is his mouth, if the dog chooses to not come I have a means of correcting which is a long line initially, and the dog is corrected with in 1 1/2 to 2 seconds of the command being given. The dog gets just enough time to process the command and decide to act. If the dog does not come it is corrected and then praised immediately when it arrives in front of me. I think the biggest issue or difference is when to correct and when to praise. I disagree with your premise or concept that a negative marker will allow you to correct a dog later on and that it is appropriate to correct a dog that is now performing correctly.
Hans, cute dog in the video but no need for an E collar to do that! No need what so ever. Show me that dog in 3 years doing tracking, obedience and protection work and lets see the precision and the happy obedience outside of it's yard. I am against using an E collar on puppies and what was seen in that video could be done with a handful of treats. Heeling a dog in a walled back yard really does not require much efffort and certainly does not require any kind of collars.
Nan,
The proofing and "setting the dog" up is a huge part of the process.
I use negative markers and positive markers. The issue I have with your approach is correcting the dog for the down which the dog did correctly. IMO, the moment to correct for not coming was missed and it happens. Not coming when called in your example was disobedience, the down which happens moments later is obedience and I do not correct for obedience.
Trust me not everything I do is positive, compulsion is a necessary part of dog training. I imprint behaviors with young dogs, I teach a good foundation motivationally and when the dog is reliable and understands the commands I proof. Proofing involves higher levels of distractions and higher levels of drives combined with higher rewards for obedience and corrections for disobedience. I will "set" the dog up with distractions and give a command, Hier or come in this example. If the dog recalls I praise and reward as if the dog came back to me with the winning power ball lottery ticket is his mouth, if the dog chooses to not come I have a means of correcting which is a long line initially, and the dog is corrected with in 1 1/2 to 2 seconds of the command being given. The dog gets just enough time to process the command and decide to act. If the dog does not come it is corrected and then praised immediately when it arrives in front of me. I think the biggest issue or difference is when to correct and when to praise. I disagree with your premise or concept that a negative marker will allow you to correct a dog later on and that it is appropriate to correct a dog that is now performing correctly.
Hans, cute dog in the video but no need for an E collar to do that! No need what so ever. Show me that dog in 3 years doing tracking, obedience and protection work and lets see the precision and the happy obedience outside of it's yard. I am against using an E collar on puppies and what was seen in that video could be done with a handful of treats. Heeling a dog in a walled back yard really does not require much efffort and certainly does not require any kind of collars.
Nan,
The proofing and "setting the dog" up is a huge part of the process.
by aaykay on 17 February 2013 - 13:02
To be quite honest, I believe other than the different tools used, Slam's and Prager's approach are roughly the same.
I agree with Slam that the disobedience should be corrected within an instant of it happening (once the moment or the opportunity to correct is missed, then move on without any further correction, and wait for the next such opportunity), and the instant he complies with the next command, reward (no more corrections for the prior "historical" mistake).
However, I do see what Prager is trying to say.......that when the dog disobeys, his voice (NO) and demeanor changes to the "angry" tone (which the dog knows) and the DOWN right after that, is also done in the same "angry" tone and even though the dog complies (with the down - I am guessing this is a "submissive DOWN" and not a "happy down" observable via the body language), he knows that the owner is still mad.....but my fear is that any further corrections at this point will be associated with the latest "down" (where he actually complied correctly) and might confuse him.....and I personally would change back the tone to "happy" and reward at this point.
I agree with Slam that the disobedience should be corrected within an instant of it happening (once the moment or the opportunity to correct is missed, then move on without any further correction, and wait for the next such opportunity), and the instant he complies with the next command, reward (no more corrections for the prior "historical" mistake).
However, I do see what Prager is trying to say.......that when the dog disobeys, his voice (NO) and demeanor changes to the "angry" tone (which the dog knows) and the DOWN right after that, is also done in the same "angry" tone and even though the dog complies (with the down - I am guessing this is a "submissive DOWN" and not a "happy down" observable via the body language), he knows that the owner is still mad.....but my fear is that any further corrections at this point will be associated with the latest "down" (where he actually complied correctly) and might confuse him.....and I personally would change back the tone to "happy" and reward at this point.
by Nans gsd on 17 February 2013 - 16:02
I do not want to train my dogs with an angry tone of voice and do not want them responding out of fear. I am sorry, to me this is counter productive and negative energy. Not the kind of training I want my dog(s) or any dog to respond to. Has to be a better way and am following Slam's enthusiasm on the reward system of excitement and rerward for the dog in a very big way. Not just a good boy, but a hugh explosion of praise. Love that. The only thing for me I find the long line hard to give a correction from a distance. I must be using it wrong. Or need to learn better methods when using it. Thx everyone, I have learned some valuable tips. Nan
by Hired Dog on 17 February 2013 - 17:02
Nan...
I hear that statement you just made very often, "I want the dog to respond not out of fear", and I agree, however, a well trained dog has been given its options and has learned which will bring it pleasure and which will result in pain and it can choose freely, for the most part.
What most people dont understand is that in order for a dog to comply reliably, every time, it has to be shown there are consequences to every action it will take. The dog has to be shown and in with some dogs, they have to "fear" those actions, otherwise they wont make the right decision.
If you are driving doing 60 in a 40 and you see Jim's car behind you, you will make the proper choice, out of fear and intelligence, to slow down before you get your punishment from Jim in the form of a ticket or possibly an arrest.
In the same analogy, the dog has been shown the "light", the huge excitement and rewards that come with complying, but, we need to also show it the "darkness" which will make the light seem brighter. In the end, dogs work for one reason in my opinion, not to please us, but to avoid the correction first, and then get the reward.
I hear that statement you just made very often, "I want the dog to respond not out of fear", and I agree, however, a well trained dog has been given its options and has learned which will bring it pleasure and which will result in pain and it can choose freely, for the most part.
What most people dont understand is that in order for a dog to comply reliably, every time, it has to be shown there are consequences to every action it will take. The dog has to be shown and in with some dogs, they have to "fear" those actions, otherwise they wont make the right decision.
If you are driving doing 60 in a 40 and you see Jim's car behind you, you will make the proper choice, out of fear and intelligence, to slow down before you get your punishment from Jim in the form of a ticket or possibly an arrest.
In the same analogy, the dog has been shown the "light", the huge excitement and rewards that come with complying, but, we need to also show it the "darkness" which will make the light seem brighter. In the end, dogs work for one reason in my opinion, not to please us, but to avoid the correction first, and then get the reward.
by Prager on 17 February 2013 - 18:02
aakay.I agree with the fact that you must not correct the dog after the performance of the command.
Let me make some definitions here:
Moment: the current fracture of the second when event happened
Presence: is a continuous time ( sum of moments) during which no other command, correction or reward was given to the dog.
Negative Mark: is the act of a trainer by which you communicate to the dog that the behavior in the instant - "Moment" the "Negative Mark"was presented is the issue which you are dealing with. ( Like refusing to obey certain command).
Negative Mark then enables you to stretch the "Moment" into continuous "Presence". This can be done based on my experience for about 30 sec max. During the 30 sec you may reinforce the continuation of the "presence" by repeating the " Negative Mark"
Now lets talk about difference between command Down and Negative Marker Down.
1.Positive ( attitude) Down:
Is a Down command delivered with positive ( higher then normal pitched voice) or neutral attitude ( same pitched voice as the trainer is using in every day life) with purpose to make dog lay down mainly during obedience training and performance or in every day life. This is positive exercise and after proper response No negative correction may follow and only positive reward is allowed.
2. Urgent Down
Is a Down command delivered with urgently loud - drill Sergeant voice in normal everyday level pitch and commanding attitude. It used in an emergency situations. Like when the dog is going to wonder into traffic. This is an emergency command and after proper response no negative correction may follow and only positive reward is allowed.
3. Negative Mark NO-Down is NO-Down correction delivered as a marker. It is the same correction as "NO". This is delivered with the same voice as corrective NO which is deep, loud-er, growling, guttural, voice. This is not Down command!
This correction exploits the well known fact that in relationship between 2 or more members of the pack or dog family down position issubmissive position often escalated into rolling over position of the dog.
{Picture is from: http://open.jorum.ac.uk/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/923/Items/S182_5_section10.html}
When the dog puts another dog into submissive position then he will often give him growl and even non injuring but very direct bite- for good measure - to make sure that the submissive dog "gets it". Thus this correction " negative NO-Down mark", may, but does not need to be, followed by correction on the collar -which simulates dominant dog's bite on the neck.
That is exactly what the trainer is doing in No-Down correction as a part of Negative Mark No-Down ,which is not a command down but it is correction which is delivered in completely different way than "command" down.
This is genetically natural, recognized, respected and non damaging scenario which we are using as a "Negative Mark" same way as wolf or dog will use. It is perfectly clear and proper communication between the trainer and the dog and HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COMMAND DOWN.
Prager Hans
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top