Has dog training actually improved. - Page 6

Hans, I also have to disagree with what you just posted and I am wondering if its for real. E collars have come a long way since the days when it was just ONE level. The newest ones have different programs to be in compliance with different countries even.
If you need to use an E collar to fry a dog, you have no business owning one, a dog or an E collar. As Slamdunk said, its a tool, like a prong or a choker, how its used is up to the trainer. 

I personally use balls and treats for reward. Have never needed an e collar, but in the UK they are not the favourite tools anyway. Other methods might take a bit longer, but the same results can be achieved. I do maintain that in any competitive sport, there are always the same people at the top of a sport. Whether it be working trials, schutzhund, obedience, Heelwork to music, agility. Because these people have a flair for reading their dogs, and applying the right type of pressure, or not, at the right time. Dog training has improved to the extent that these tools are available, and the dogs are more motivated, but it will always take an understanding of how to use, or not use the tools. There is always the once in a lifetime dog, that will carry any handler to the top, in any sport, but it takes the handler to consistently take the next dog, and the next dog, to the top as well. And  the ultimate handler will work with what he has, and not just get rid of what doesn't work and pass on to the next one.
I might not be at the top of the discipline I choose to work in, but my dogs enjoy it, and achieve what I hope they are capable of.

Jim,
have you even read what I  have written?  Where have  I said that clickes are "garbage". I must have since in your post it is in quotation marks, which  indicate direct quote.  But can you point me to that  place in my post?  
  As far as e colars go. It looks like you stopped reading  at 10 000 Volts.  Just because you insult me and say that you disagree does not mean that you are right.  You disagree with what part of my statement? You can not just stump you foot like a little child  and say I disagree, I disagree, I disagree! 

Dogs enjoy the bond they develop with the handler regardless of the tool if the training is fair and competent. I can read a dog's body language when it is working from tail waggin to overall demeanor....I have seen dogs trained by balls, toys, remotes, and compulsion that indicate they are happy when they are working....I have also seen dogs trained with balls, tugs, remotes, and compulsion that are in "conflict" while working, though they may be executing the task. Training with balls, food, tugs, do not mean the dog is happy just as training with remotes or compulsion doesn't mean the dog isn't happy....except in the minds of some people who only favor or prefer one way.

Hired dog   in my post I am not disputing validity of  e collar as a training device.  ( That is  a different topic and it had been done ad nauseum . ) What I am pointing out is that just because someone is using effective device to train dog that does not mean that  they  are better trainer then the one who does not use it.  Thus to mention device as an improved of training as Jim did is not logical.
  For example  did air traveling improved since now we fly in faster airplanes then 40 years ago? Yes flights are faster, but everything else sucks. Seats are smaller, air conditioning is off to save money, meals are not  part of the price  and the ones you buy are not fit for human consumption.   The planes are safer and more technologically advanced.  But does that indicate that  the pilots and their flying are now better then before just because they are flying better plains. Not necessarily.  What I am saying tools are not necessarily  a  reason for something better. If the pilot sucks and you crash regardless if you are in plane from 1980 or from 20013 you will be dead.  And vice versa. If the great pilot deliverers me in more comfortable but slower plane  to my destination then I would say that such pilot is and such transportation is better.  Thus a the device is part of of the equation  but not necessarily reason for better performance. 
Prager Hans

Gustav that is exactly what I am saying. You just made  the point way more clear then I did. Jim said that training now is better then before  because we are using e collars. And I am saying that e collar  is not necessarily indication of better training or reason   for saying that training  is now better then before.
Prager Hans 

dog training has gotten better. Relationships between dog trainers has a new obstacle , chat rooms!  I was present when a newbie was bragging about how great their own dog was trained. She was bragging in front of seasoned pro with a large resume. His statement ''this is why we have trials''.  Go see trials in any sport or the police dog trials in your area. Find the preformance you like best and follow that handler/trainer.  Did the winner have a good day? Or is the dogs preformance  predictable and can it be recreated often. Find out methods this person uses. Trials are a peer review and should be a tool to further the quest of dog training. Another thought. Dogs 100 years ago  did one job and had great instints bred into them. If you had a large flock of sheep you did not want to take 4 years to devolope the new sheep dog, you wanted it ASAP and the dog was born with instints. Look for the natural working dog in all training format. It will be the best in potential maybe not in points.

Hans..
I am not very big in writing entire paragraphs to argue my point or try to convince anyone of something. You are indeed a better pilot if you are flying something today VS 1970. You are indeed a better "driver" if today you are driving a nuclear sub VS one from 1950.
Again, ANY moron can slap a tool on a dog and cause pain, ANY tool, but, it takes someone with skill, timing, know how, talent and a respect for the animal. I can go on and on and try to explain, but , for what?

Ok, Hans you said "silly gimmick" to quote you correctly.  Yes, I have now stopped reading your post after the last contradiction that you made. You have obviously not read my posts or understood the context in which they written and what they were in response too.   I will stop stomping my feet now like a child.   Of course you are correct what was I thinking?

Jim,
Everything you have said has made perfect sense, as it would to anyone that knows how to and does train dogs.

Gustav,
You have also made some excellent posts, as have others, it seems though, that some are having difficulty with comprehension.
(I guess reading hasn't improved over the years, lol!)

Training methods and techniques have gotten better, regardless of the tools being used.
The tools have also gotten better, and there are more of them available.
(I am not saying more tools is better, just that more training tools have been invented and made available)
Whether the improved methods and improved tools are being implemented, and by whom, is another discussion.
For some, maybe using the word "evolved" as opposed to "better" is more easily swallowed.


Hopefully for each individual your own training skill has improved over the years.
That should always be the goal, regardless of methods or tools.