Cookie training vs Correction training... - Page 4

If you're catching it at the shifting, a verbal correction usually suffices.  You're catching it early.  The earlier you catch a behavior, the lower the level of correction is actually needed.  The dog hasn't really *committed* to the behavior, he's considering it.

Verbal correction for shifting, followed by praise when he settles again, and he begins building that very clear picture of what down is.  And isn't.

This is an excerpt from a PM convo about marker training ["cookie training"].  These are my words, so I'm relatively sure I'm not violating the TOU.

I feel that *some* of the success of marker training when used on our sorts of dogs, depends on the selection of dogs best suited to that style of training. That is, dogs that have high levels of drive for either a ball, tug, or food, but remain clear-headed while in drive.

To that end, marker training could almost be considered the best measure of breed suitability for a GSD. The standard calls for a dog with high levels of drive, while remaining clear headed.
A dog that cannot be trained to SchIII with marker training, is likely a dog that is outside the GSD breed standard, in terms of temperament.

I agree that any dog can be trained with markers, but that the reliability of the dog's compliance will depend on his temperament [which is again where the argument could be made that marker training at that level is proof of breed worthiness.]

Mudwick, a titled dog is not always a "trained" dog, when you see some SchH titled dogs off the field and many are not even well behaved, some are aggressive, and some only work well in their routine when they are expecting a tennis ball, tug, or helper bite. Can their dogs perform as well with 10 loose dogs running around them?  Not always.  20 minutes on a field titling a well-bred dog doesn't make one a dog trainer, so don't put yourself down.

On down-stays- You have to be careful about trying to mark the exact second he breaks, because if the dog becomes confused, or feels that he is in trouble, the most likely outcome is for the dog to want to avoid you, feel stress, or to bolt away.  The worst method I have seen is when a dog breaks a down-stay and wanders away, the trainer goes towards the dog and then corrects right there and then.  Now there's a new problem of the dog not wanting to come to you, a bad association with you approaching.

 I hear "marker" I think positive, like when Prince obeys a command I say, "yes"....could a marker be a negative...like when a dog shifts his weight on a down I say "ah".......I hope this makes sense.....

Ruger, Yep.  You can have both negative and positive markers.
Different people call it different things.  I've also heard it called a "non-reinforcement" marker.

Dober, that is again, why you don't correct a dog until you KNOW he knows the command.  You avoid the confusion.
That's also why you want to correct the second the thought of breaking crosses his mind, rather than long after he's broken, when he may think you're correcting him for any number of things, including, like you said, coming to you.

Ah, the lovely debate...... we'd really have to define what correction is.... and what positive is....
My current sch 3 dog doesn't bark in the car at other dogs or people because I have trained him not to, lives in the house with other dogs and a cat, is totally under control outside of the sch field environment, leaves the sleeves alone at the side of the field during obedience, and so far has been pretty much 99.9 percent reliable. He's had 15 (I've counted!) pinch collar corrections in his life, other than that I would call his training positive. I walk out on the obedience and protection field with him totally naked unless I'm forming an association with his fursaver before a trial. He's certainly scored well in more than just "club" conditions. As far as positive training taking more time than others, how many other dogs have a Sch 3, and French ring 1 title at 3.5 years old?
Of course I can only speak of him and since he is a control group of one, how valid is he? Maybe his temperament is uniquely suited for clicker training? I'd love to hear of other people adapting clicker training to bite sports as well! We certainly seem to be few and far between.
As far as positive training working with adult dogs who have had inconsistant reinforcements throughout their lives, I can only again, speak from my experience. As a professional dog trainer, I've had tremendous success using positive reinforcement with rescue dogs, dog aggressive and people aggressive, etc.... I can't fix dogs who've had inconsistant e collar work, especially when associated with other dogs or people. In fact, I just put the e collar back on a client's dog and taught her how to turn the collar off. For that dog, it was the best confidence builder ever....
I frankly am sick of this debate. Training, no matter what kind, usually works for any type of work, because suddenly things are consistant in a dog's life. Rewarding a dog for good behavior and correcting a dog for what the handler considers bad behavior or disobedience works just fine and dogs have been winning at the world and national Sch level for years with that type of training.
BUT: if you haven't placed well at a high level, then stop saying whether your training is better than other training. You aren't qualified to give that opinion. No matter how many people you have seen or mentored under, if you haven't done it yourself, I don't think you are qualified to tell me, or other positive trainers, that my training doesn't work or isn't reliable or whatever.... If you have placed well, I'd love to pick your brain for training tips, no matter what your method....
Shade

 If you are holding a treat and the dog looks upward, you're using a lure, that's what it's called.

I understand what you are saying, but to *me* there is a big difference between subtle body language and someone holding a visible cookie in their hand and having the dog follow it.  You see this in schutzhund a lot, for heeling, where the people hold the food in their hand and have the dog mindlessly follow the hand.  HOw much learning is the dog doing? What choices is the dog making? None. Before I ever start heel training with baby puppies, they understand that the food or toy is RIGHT THERE, in front of them, and they have learned to IGNORE IT.  If they look at the toy, or food - the game stops. So they can't be lured. Make sense? (Not sure I explained it clearly)

 
However, there is no consequence to unwanted behaviors,

This was the hardest thing for me to come to terms with while learning about positive. I really thought that a dog must be  "proofed" by putting it in a position to make mistakes and then letting them have it.  I think the idea that the dog "knows it" and is "refusing" to do something has to be looked at differently from the traditional "the dog is giving me the finger", etc we hear so often.

The way it was explained to me, that made it clearest (for me) was this:  say you have a dog with useful drives for food or toy.  You have raised him to understand that he will get his beloved ball in exchange for performing a behavior on cue.  Let's use my dog Grimbo for example. Grimbo's mom is the pride of the WSP explosives detection dog program and his sire is an absolute toy FREAK.  He inherited good genes, and his life IS the ball.  He's that type of dog that comes out of the kennel, (not crate) gives you a quick hug and then MUST find a ball. Nothing else matters, no pooping, no nothing until he finds the ball.

 He drives me crazy in the yard, just quitely rolling the damn ball to me for HOURS! Since he was neutered,  females in heat are no contest compared to his ball. He has been raised to be as non dog aggressive as possible, and will walk away from trouble if offered his ball.    

Now. I really don't think there is much of anything in this world that Grimbo wants more than his ball.  So, Grimbo has problems with the position exercises. Why? Because of my lack of skill as a trainer.  I made the mistake of trying to train the positions with his ball when he was young.  It was "too much" and I developd a dog with bulging eyes who can't even think straight if he thinks we are going to do positions.  He hops along, expecting the ball, and he really can't focus.  

So I heel along, and say "sit"  and he stops and squats and his butt is 9" off the ground.  Why? Is he "giving me the finger"? Is it because "he knows there will be no consequences?"  Is it because he "doesn't know the exercise well enough?"

Remember, Grimbo will do ANYTHING for his ball. If he can.  Ask yourself... is Grimbo saying "Hey, I think I'll mess with Diane and NOT GET MY BALL! Yeah, that will be cool!"

 

Once you've developed the language of markers between yourself and the dog, you can give "negative" markers when the incorrect behavior is offered.

But that takes a time and experience, and it depends on the dog.  Just like charging the positive marker, the dog has to be taught to understand the meaning of the negative marker.

__


I'm not sure where the idea is that we're standing there holding a cookie over the dog's head.
The food is never visable when I train my dog with food.  Yes, obviously, the dog knows its present [i can't turn her nose off], but its behind my back.  She doesn't get anything from staring at the location of the food [although we did have a war for awhile with coming to heel from the recall.  she magically learned she could *bump* food out of the bag on her way around, lol.]

ABSOLUTELY NOT! He would - if he could - do what ever it takes to get his ball.

So, I could smack his ass with the leash end, ignoring the over stimulated state I have put him in, and BLAME THE DOG for not doing it right. Or I could get my head out of my butt and use a lower ranked reward, and (lo and behold) the dog can do it. Now Grimbo is not a super bright dog, bless his heart, and many a smarter dog could work through this, but he can't. Bring out the ball, and he overloads. Use food, he's fine.

So should the "consequence" for his failure to obey in this situation result in "correction"? I happen to think not. Because I KNOW the dog wants the ball more than ANYTHING, simply put, if he could, he would. This is where taking the blame off the dog, and looking at myself as the teacher has REALLY helped me become a better trainer than I was.


Another thing is the time it takes. While you may not mind devoting a lot of time working on the behaviors you want, the average person is not, and IMO should not, need to take over a year to teach loose leash walking.

More than time it takes patience and it takes an interest that I have to agree with you that 99% of the pet clients out there are not going to be interested in. Heck, 99% of dog trainers aren't! : )   Obviously, it doesn't take "a year" to teach loose leash heeling, if done correctly, but your point is valuable - it would be daunting indeed to try and get the level of committment from "hurry up and make my dog perfect" pet owners.  MUCH easier to jerk than think.  And I don't mean that in a disrespectful way toward compulsion trainers, I'm just saying that for pet owners who usually don't have their dog's respect or interest, positive methods can be really difficult to teach. 

I'll give you an example of "loose leash" training:  I allow all my dogs to pull on the lead unless under a command. ALways have, always will. Yup, even though I walk with a cane!  Doesn't bother me, they seem to enjoy it,  just how we do things.  So, here you have a young Dirk, the male pit bull. He understood the "heel" command, but it dawned on me that I had CONDITIONED him to drag my ass into the training field at the ring club.  Everytime we went to do bitework, I put on his harness and let him drag me in there while he barked and went nuts.  I had really trained my dog well!  It wasn't a problem, but it occured to me that in a month he would be going for his Brevet title right here where I had conditioned him to do this.  

Picture this: you take your dog out of the car, TAKE HIS COLLAR OFF, and proceed to walk onto the field, with the dog knowing the decoy is there!  Quite a change in procedure!  Now, I could put a prong collar on, and jerk his ass.  That is what I would have done before I started using positive.  To save you alot of reading, and me alot of typing, I can just say that it took 20 minutes. Dirk had learned that he got his reward in exchange for the desired behavior.  He wanted to bite. All I had to do was show him HOW HE COULD EARN that bite. Everytime he darted forward we went all the way back to inthe car. Every time. Back to the very beginning. He's NOT a dumb dog, and while young and brash, he quickly learned how to earn his bite.  The same thing applied to sitting beside me on the "line" while the decoy taunted him (dog with no collar on in trial).  He was a very steady dog on the line.  No problems. And, no corrections - ever. &n