dogdude

So now we agree that while formal obedience is not neccessary, if you want a competitive dog in agility it should be?

Poodlefan Where do you think the most cost effective and convenient place to learn how to control a dog off lead would be? Like any other dog sport, the trainers dog is always his best advertisement, and yes, I have seen dogs in all levels of trialling that are unreliable in the world outside the ring. This does not reflect on formal obedience as a sport though! I also know plenty of people who could not cut it in formal obedience who then switch over to agility, then sit there bagging obedience and all of its "pressures" on the dog etc. You can't train focus and off lead reliablility by running your dog through a tunnel! Just for the record, I am not a fan of agility, but I would promote any dogsport aimed at building a better bond with its owner.

I'm sorry, but I am hard pressed to understand the meaning of the above two posts? Dogs are not naturally "self controlled"off lead, someone needs to be able to teach it effectively in order to have "Guaranteed reliablility"! Its called "formal obedience".

Hi Tryamartimmy Focus on getting the pup to walk with you, rather than focusing on the lead. Ditch it until he is walking with you, and work on short sharp lessons, starting off with just a few paces with soft treats, and build it from there. Work when he is hungry. When you introduce the lead later, he will hardly even know its there.

I recently taught Oscar to catch food by passing it to his mouth at first, in a throwing motion (underarm). Inch by inch I then started to drop it into his mouth, then a short gentle throw. I used soft moist food at first, so he wanted to almost inhale it down. He now can catch food from almost anywhere. Prior to this he just let it bounce off his head. Do it when they are real hungry!

It could also be a combination of problems. From what I have seen of her, she didn't seem to show any resentment towards the judge or Steward during the FOO run throughs, but it could also be a loss of drive. When Ness is working in the switch "on" position, she is truly wonderfull to watch. I know you have done some work with food drive, would using it, rather than prey drive work better for you guys? Are all of the other "prey" distractions at the trial her reward in lew of the restrictions that are placed on your normal reward system, being at the trial? In your training, do you reward her at the end of the session, or end of exercise? Certainly a frustrating problem, but no more talk of throwing in the towel :D :D She's a lovely dog with far too much potential to cheer you up with once you get over the problem!! P.S: I can't remember her age?

I use a double handed "shoo", where palms finish up in the "high ten position". Not really out of neccessity, more out of habit!

My advice is to not worry about it, and dont bother to analize things too much. At the end of the day its just one instructors preference, which will vary from one to another. Just take peace of mind that it can also work both ways, sometimes in your favour. Today for example I had my Novice test in which I thought was "just ok", the instructor gave us a score of 191!

Congrats Leopuppy!!!! Great news!!

Yes, but "thats dog training"! We were all newbys at one time, I'm sure that every handler would love to rewind the clock to their first dog! :D

Basically, I qualify disobedience as things like, drive overtaking the dogs choice to complete a commanded task. I dont think that disobedience is always a bi-pproduct of poor training. Things like prey and self preservation drives and others are often going to overtake drive modes in the dogs mind, no matter how well proofed IMO. I think of disobedience in that context, and train with it in mind.

Oscar dos'nt offer it "off bat", but he still loves to satisfy his drive (food). He will do most things asked of him with vigour, (with tail wagging off its hinges) to satisfy the drive, other than sit and drop in puddles. That seems to extinguish the drive no matter how worked up he is. Its a problem that we are trying to sought out.

Strangely, I've never been nervy in a trial, even my first! Different story when each of my kids were born though. I worked on a dairy farm at the time of my first childs birth, and thought that I had seen enough live births to last me a life time. I was very mistaken!

Same as MrsD. If and when I use "heel", it is the same position, and I expect it done with the same focus. The example given while walking past another dog in the street is the sought of practicle reason it was designed for. If on a walk normally, there is no command from me. I just expect him to pay me a "peripheral attention". To me, having two commands for basically the same thing is a bit pointless. I think trial training is pointless if you are not applying whatever you can into the real world. It also promotes the ringwise dog syndrome, and thats also why I would like to see some new exercises in trials, otherwise, a trial just becomes a bunch of tricks in sequence. That is not what was originally intended.

Dogs ear in line with leg. :D Not a fan of the UK stuff. To me its ballroom dancing, not heeling

Well done Leopuppy! ;)

Another good way to teach drop on recall, is to teach them to firstly do a full recall over multiple low barriers. When you first introduce the drop, you start by asking for it close to you, drop them at the last board (which discourages them from creeping), then walk to them and return to heel and reward. As you progress, recall them after the drop, and vary which board you drop them at. The boards also encourages them to take off fast on the second recall (to clear the jumps).

Yes, your right WMR, I stand corrected. I'm not sure that practical experience matters at the end of the day, how many football/Cricket umpires have played at the elite level, etc, etc. I dont think we would have too many judges going around if those rules were in place. The rules are still in black and white, someone will always interpret them in their own way.

WMR That would only enable them to judge CCD, as well as having to steward 3 Novice trials to be eligable. To Judge UD, you have to pass 3 Open titles, and steward 3 times in UD.

Although I hav'nt trialled recently, most of the old judges are still around in Melbourne, and I cant recall anything negative about their judging. My first trial was judged by a true gentleman of the sport who always made newbys feel relaxed and was very pleasant (Frank Neeson) who is no longer on the judges list I see. I can think of far more good judges than bad ones.

One observation that I have made on this forum, is that I have never viewed a post asking about information to become an obedience judge. At the end of the day there is always going to be more people trying to get something out of the sport, rather than giving something back to it. As I am not in the position to become one to change things for myself, I am happy to take my chances.

Great work Superminty!!

I agree that some judges, usually the younger ones, try to talk too much, and try to push there training practices and beliefs on the competitors far too often. I found that the majority, especially the older judges, are great, and do more to relax the handler than worry about preaching technique or advice when it was not asked for. Just like every other sport that has a human referee/umpire/judge, you are going to get different opinion and views. It is a sport of precision, it has quite clear rules, someone will always interpret them slightly differently, sometimes to your advantage, sometimes not. I think like other sports, sometimes the wrong decision will be made, but I dont think we should all pack up our bat and balls and go home! My sympathy goes out to those in the thread that have been a victim of a bad decision, but I dont think the thread is doing wonders for the sport.

Hi Tapferhund Can I ask you, did you witness all of the above incidents?, or were they second hand news? I ask this because people tend to blame others more often than not to save face etc. There is nothing in the rules to say where your hands should be resting during the stand for exam, unless the incident in question was seen as a double signal. I would challenge it either way. But in saying that, did you witness this incident? Incidents like pause during the recall is not an automatic NQ, but a points deduction, which probably just contributed to the NQ. The other rules are pretty black and white. Some judges are harsher than others, some have more, and less experience than others. IMO the standard is there for a reason, and far too many handlers enter with a wing and a prayer attitude. Where do you draw a line in the sand? ;)

Hi Myszka Refering to your original post, I can see a very simple answer. Don't place your dog in a ring until you have full confidence in both your dogs ability, and your own. Train without the dog with an observer to get your movement problems sorted, then take a few steps back to fix all your small problems one by one. Crooked sits etc are not usually caused by body language, most often caused by two things, 1) where your dog has been taught to focus, and 2) where and when you reward from. Manually adjusting a dog during an exercise with body language only encourages a lazy minded dog. How many handlers do you see that constantly back up their dogs to re-adjust a crooked sit. It only teaches them that you will always be there to help them, so no need to remember. All you need to do is provide the drive, and show them how to satisfy it, by being in the correct position. I personally would not proof for wonky walking or being drunk, or anything like that. I know that you are very knowledgeable about dog training, but sometimes I think that we over complicate things, when most seemingly complex problems can be solved by going back to the basics. I know I have been guilty of that in the past.