Has dog training actually improved. - Page 9

aakay;
Brag away, I am betting it's safe to assume the sire and dam
of both your bitch and your male aren't titled at all, otherwise
you would be sure to mention it. News flash, pretty much all dogs
are linebred on a famous accomplished dog or two, and those
dogs are almost always titled in some manner 

As long as you are happy with your dogs, that's what counts,
no one else has to purchase the food they eat nor live with them, 
so it shouldn't matter what others think of your dogs at all. 

And, for the record, I don't believe anyone attributed the 'pet'
dog comment to your dog at all specifically. I honestly don't
think there is anything wrong with a dog fulfilling the role of
a pet. There is no shame in that role whatsoever.

I think you just missed the entire point of what people were
discussing with regards to training being better since
20+ years ago.  It's very similar to the train of thought that
Hans has regarding e-collars and their use. It's odd that 
he has such aversion to an e-collar being used, and a belief
that the use of an e-collar will mentally damage a dog forever,
but yet had no problem with someone "testing" green dogs
at his kennel, mentally pushing dogs that were obviously
not confident in flight/fight mode.
And yes, it's all on video, all one has to do is look on Youtube
and watch those infamous 'Master P' videos. 

Regarding the ecollar debate....

Anything and everything can be used incorrectly and abusively.  Verbal commands can be used incorrectly and abusively.  I'm not sure it's fair to compare the correct use of one training technique with the incorrect use of another training technique.  If a dog is getting zapped to it's max level right out of the gate, then of course it's wrong just as screaming at a dog and standing over it in a threatening position.

By the way, I have a clicker velcroed to the remote of an ecollar and I use lots and lots of food in training and use toys.  I have a prong collar, which I think is much safer than a choke collar or a flat collar.

I think the trainking has improved, in that people think thru what would suit one dog, or another, and use the things that motivate their dogs, to get the best from them. The tools, whether they be a lead, a clicker, food, or a prong collar, or an e collar, are only as good as the person using them.
There will always be some people that should never have a dog, and abuse can be inflicted by using any tool incorrectly.

I agree on many levels to previous posters.

I train dogs since 1978. In Schutzhund since 1981.

I have personally not seen anyone that titled a dog in 3-4 months unless the dog was previously trained.

A lot of exercises are easier to train today, as we understand dog behaviour much more as we did then. This enables us to move away from working with mainly submission and positive punishment but use a variety of different training methods (positive/negative reinforcement - positive/negative punishment as a mix and dependent on the dog's individual personalityand ability).

I actually need less training equipment than 30 years ago. And I have better equipment available that lasts longer.
Dog training is much for fun now.

Workingdogz: As long as you are happy with your dogs, that's what counts,

Yes, you are right !    

Actually, the parents are also titled (they need to be, to be bred in Czech/Slovakia) but they are not "legends" like the linebreeding that led to my boy and girl, but as you know,  I am more interested in the genetic traits that are seen in my dog (which I am thrilled with, personally), than the titles of his or her parents.....since titles of dogs that I don't own (the parents), don't translate into the right genes coming together in the resultant progeny (the dogs that I do own). 

Tingiesandtails
Absolutely a dog can be titled within 2-4 months time.
I did note a 'decent' dog, meaning one with suitable drive and 
temperment to do the work. I'm not talking about a puppy etc.
I am referencing a young dog, usually around the 15-18 month 
of age mark. I still believe and know that if proper training is supplied,
and the dog worked consistently 5-7 days a week there is no
reason that dog cannot be titled in a 2-4 month time frame. 
Now, the trainers that take in dogs for titles don't want most
people to know that, as they usually charge by the month 

It is rather funny that everyone who seeks to improve their
ability as a trainer has to get a bigger training bag every couple
of years, but what's even funnier is, the 'go to' items are usually
the good old standbys! Materials used to make leashes and long
lines have improved, although we can't seem to let go of our leather
tracking lines, traditionalists I suppose, and we hang on to our old
fursavers, like everything else, even they have changed slightly in
quality too-not always for the better either. 


aakay;
I don't seem to remember your females sire and dam being titled.
I am assuming these are the same two dogs you posted the pedigree
links to on another site? But thats ok, like I said, as long as you are
happy with your dogs, that is all that counts!

I am a firm believer that anyone who owns a dog should be not only
proud of that dog, but be happy to call the dog their own. If you don't
believe your dog is one of the best, well, why feed it? The one thing
you fail to recognize is, somewhere along the line, those dreaded
'sport titles' meant something to a shitload of people or they would
never have bred the dogs that produced the sire and dam of your dogs 

There is a reason that some breed registries require a working title
and health clearances before progeny can be registered from two dogs.
It is the hope it will maintain a certain level of measurable quality that
indicates the dogs are in fact breedworthy. And frankly? I don't care
what kind of title someone puts on a dog, I am just proud of anyone
that gets out there and does anything with their dog and tests it in
some sort of unbiased standarized arena before deciding to 
breed the dog or not. Would I prefer a title that involved all three
aspects that schutzhund offers? Sure. Because I am still of the 
belief that when schutzhund is trained 'right' and done 'right',
it is still a good test for potential breeding dogs. Of course one must
expand from there, but, at least it is a jumping off point.
 

Workingdogz, my boy's parents (and my Chocolate Lab's parents) are titled but when it came to the girl, I was specifically looking for genetics that contained: Balli Panta Rei, Norbo Ben Ju, Dargo Ha Ja Da, Pluto z PS and Gero z BZ (I was hoping for maybe Balli and Pluto in a pup, but when I got all of these in the same pup, it was like hitting the jackpot, since now I could strengthen on any specific trait that each of these greats bought to the table).  Those genetics are a rare combo that is typically not found too readily. 

Thus when I imported her over from Canada, she costed well over what I would have paid to source a pup (even from highly titled parents) locally from the US.....her extra cost was totally worth it for me, since her value is all in her genetics (and I can see those genetics at work every day).  And by this action of prioritizing genetics over everything else, you might have noticed how much I care about titles ! 

aakay
Genetics are a great thing, but, one must pay the most attention
to the actual sire and dam the puppy come from. That is where 
the most impact will come from. If the mother is a nervy spook,
do not expect much more than that from the puppies. And it 
doesn't matter one bit how 'great' the next few generations
are in a pedigree if the first generation sucks. One can almost
squeak by breeding a really good bitch to a mediocre male, but
you will never win, no matter what's back in the 2nd, 3rd,4th and 5th
generation if the female is a dud.

Workingdogz 

Plenty of people buy and then breed a dog from a famous kennel but have never done anything with the dog.  Because a dog comes from a famous kennel or has a lot of titled famous dogs in it's pedigree does not make that dog "automatically" breed worthy.  I see folks actually line breeding mediocre dogs, as bad as father and daughter matings to produce dogs that still have "famous" dogs in the pedigree.  People will see a litter heavily line bred on a certain dog and think they are getting something good, when in all likelihood neither dog brings any thing all, nothing even very good to the breeding except the names on the pedigree.  I'm not talking about aakay's dogs specifically, because I do not know the breeding and have not seen the dogs. 

Slam is dead on correct. I look at it this way, if all you have to 
offer me about the litter you bred is that it is linebred  _-_-_-_
times on this dog and that, well it tells me even you as the 
breeder believe the sire and dam have much to offer 

I won't even touch the 'father-daughter' breeding idea either.
If that type of inbreeding is going to be done, it should be done
by a very experienced breeder, not some schmuck that just 
thinks it all looks great on paper and that his/her dogs are 
Rock Stars.