Positive training question - Page 3

Yea I admit my philosophy of "repetition"  likely would not produce trial champions.  Trials want dogs that kind of perform like a robot in a way.  Very linear and exact.  Where as my repetition method results more in just a knowledgable animal that understands meanings of words and can perform when they really feel like it if the moment and situation arises in the real world as the motivation is the dogs own.

In theory, if you train an "out" and reward it with another opportunity to bite/play the game, you can create a conditioned response that the dog doesn't even think about but only reacts when he hears the word.  Outting gets the game played again, which is the best reward ever if the dog loves the game.  No out, no more bite.   The dog learns to love "out" because it starts the game all over again.  The couple of dogs  I've seen trained to "out" with something like the two-hose/ball game have fast clean outs with little conflict.   Now, whether you *want* conflict in your training purposely or not is, I think,  another debate.

Heather

It's a nice valid question.
I know that the Washington Patrol is using mainly positive methods to get the searching behavior they want for their drug and bomb dogs but they still choke the dogs off the toy, anything but positive.
I've trained my dog, Reiki, quite nicely to do beautiful Schutzhund work in all 3 phases, with MOSTLY positive. He has his French Ring 1, his Sch 3, his CD, competes Nationally, with protection scores ranging from 93-98. He's not a robot and the more I train with positive reinforcement, the less repetition I have to do. Hopefully, he'll get his ring 2 this winter and then compete in AWDF in April.
He has had 15 pinch collar corrections. 2 for failing to sit in front of the helper when I ask right before his Sch 1 ( I will regret those forever!) and the rest for getting a quicker out in Sch before his Sch 2 trial and before his Brevet in french ring. (for the out-guard off the decoy) I am not sure if he needed any of those, and indeed I might have created conflict where I didn't want it. Early on, a couple years ago, at an Ivan seminar, his guard in the blind got too close and we used correction (lemon juice) to get more distance. At the end of the seminar, Reiki decided he didn't really care about lemon juice and guarded close anyway. I fixed hisguarding distance by taking the fight away. But perhaps the conflict created by the lemon juice has now made his guard more flashy?
So Reiki's training has been anything but purely positive. But I give him as an example of very little correction and I still have a dog who competes clear headedly in 2 bite sports, and at a National level in one. I would love to know of any other people who are doing this, because when I have problems I need to bounce ideas off of others and not get "well, I would string him up for that" answers.
Shade

And of course Reiki would not take a treat for failing to out. He'd probably bite someone who suggested that! What he loves most is to strike and fight and if he has to out to get another chance to fight, that makes sense to him.

Remember this day,,,,,it will come up in the future

You go Shade, impressive. I'm a little confused and maybe it's the verbage or interpretation of words by the OP? And on most things I'm a visual person. If Reiker wouldn't release on the "out", (but he always does) I would want to know why. 

Maybe It's the way I'm wired but my dogs' first commands that are taught/understood are NO, SIT, OUT, STAY, COME/HERE and KENNEL. No means no and that covers a vast majority of unwanted behaviors. A prime example is my 17 mo. old pup, Bella. I know some think like me and I know some don't even think of it. But even at 9 to ten weeks training needs to start. Yes she's a puppy and needs to be a puppy. But she can't be destructive, tear things up, rough house in the house or roughhouse and rile up all the other dogs in the house. Outdoors no problem, in doors, definately not. So learning and ubderstanding that command covers a multitude of unwanted behaviors. And when I say no she understands. SIT;  If Reiker, now 8 1/2 was training say at off leash exercises and a stuation arose,  say a cat ran by and he starts to take off I could command sit and he would sit and either wait for me to recall him or come to hime to put a leash on or just recall him. whatever one I chose for the situation.  Also, a good example for SIT is a couple of weeks ago I was doing some sidework for a client and her next door neighbor let their dog out, walking around off leash. Well that dog came over into the yard because it does whatever it wants. I'm out at my truck. Ana and Bella or crated, Reiker is free. But as soon as I here all the commotion and turn around to see the dog coming in to the yard and Reiker wanting to check it out. I was too far away to do anything so I just commanded him to sit til I could come around the house and see what was going on. Once coming around the house I saw the other dog in the yard next to Reiker. Maybe I take it for granted but it's just reassurance knowing that they know and understand my commands. Now if someone else tried to tell them what to do that's another story.

So, in my eyes, yes it's the dog, yes it's the training, yes it's the dog understanding the commands. I trained Reiker with notreats, no taking away his food. He definately had corrections but when he (don't want to say failed?) but when he didn't complete the command or task I immediately did that task or command three times in oder for him to recieve praise. He was taught both verbal and non-verbal commands.

For me I like Stings' and the other guys' in depth breakdown. That was good. But I don't fully understand the OPs ? end result he is looking to obtain? I don't want to come across wrong but what works for someone else might not work for you or your dog? And each dog is so different. For the guy that is telling him whatever he is telling him, theres two or three guys saying something different. Experiement might be the wrong word but experiement with your dog. Find out what makes him want to please you like no tomorrow,  And never say never for you or your dogs' abilty. They have wonderful minds and wonderful hearts! And if progress or ability is hindered by you as the handler look into hiring someone to further the dog. The dog will still be your best friend! Good luck.   

Oh this has to be explained. "Positive reinforcement is for obedience training"

Now you have to define obedience. You gave your definition of,

"Negative reinforcement is for stopping unwanted behavior and distraction proofing"

The problem with law enforcement training is time. You have anywhere from 8 to 16 weeks for a dog and handler team to complete a PTC K9 course.  Purely postive training takes more time but has a better long term outcome.

For whatever reason bonding and reading your dog is not often discussed.  This has a large impact on training.  Knowing your dog is huge too.  One way of learning about your dog is observing him while he is tracking.  This is one of the only tests where the dog is asked to work on his own and it is up to you to figure out what your dog is doing and telling you.

As someone said before training should not be cookie cutter but gear toward a particuilar dog.  If you have a strong bond and know how to read your dog, you will know what method will work best for THAT dog.

Kyle

Hmm.. it is interested that our communications [defintitions]  are polluted-  unlike how canines communicate.. by this i mean .. punishment is not a reinforcer !! WHY .. because ... it is a consequence that usually takes place AFTER the FACT !!! a slight difference here BUT not Semantics .A  fundamental : dogs learn by association and the timing of  a reward , whether positve or negative in the sense of "TIME' appurtanant to the behavior .. i.e.  in close to time when the behavior was pereformed !! even a second or two delay can be critical to the communication of a canine.  A second fundamental : the best time to encourage , or if need be in cliche terminology , correct the dog IS when the dog 'Thinks about " a behavior as well asrewarding [ pos or neg]  at the exact instant a behavior 'IS PERFORMED' ... ... again ,  not after the fact .. that is 'PUNISHMENT !!" , which is very very destructive !!

Science has proven that in order for a dog to a make an association/connection between a beavior and  praise/correction is .015 to 1.5 seconds.  Before or after that time frame reduces the dogs ability to make that association/connection.

sting .. i small cometnatary regarding your post.. TRUE .. dogs do learn by repitition .. BUT ponder these two thoughts :  HOW MANY REPITITIONS does it take for a dog to learn ?? ?? 100 , 50 , - i have seen some of my GSDS learn the task give 5 repetitions .. an example .. to bark on cue... AND i have seen them learn  from 1 [one ] experience ! case in point ... a puppy meeting my cat the first time , or a GSD putting it's nose near the wood stove [ actually .. didn't even have to touch it's nose to it to learn " DANGER"]. Last thought.... if a dog always had to repeatrepeat repeat  something to learn ... then there would be no generalization from one or few experiences  ...... have you ever seen a dog offer a behavior with no cue , no training ?  case in point ... dogs that have detected and indicated a cancer... this occurs fist .. you have had to knowm the person had the cancer before you could communicaet to the dog you wanted it to find the cancer. !! which leaves me to the point ...DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE MIND OF A DOG !!! there are TWO kinds of Insturmental [ ]operative, or so called 'positive training '. ] many times i have seen people do what they think is positve traniing in the lingo .. but they are really not doing purely 'postive training methodology] .. like the Sch people that use hot dogs right up to trial day ./.. at trail . no hot dogs but the dog perfroms.. that is not pure postive training .. positive training results : phase out the rewards and the dog still responds -the dog will conitnue to perform ... THAT is Positive training.