ness

Here you go - Kenz's routine from two different camera angles - well and truly captured her FERALNESS . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQBUb_9asuE&feature=email

MP3 - upload into itunes and then burn CD as normal.

Bugger .

Yeah the judge was saying it was obvious those dogs who had done UD the first night and had come back for Open the second night performed better. Well done on your results - would have loved to have done the agility as well but oh well silly injured Kenz. Kenz was on really early (ended up having to go in second) which didn't help things as normal the crowd starts out and then dies after the first couple of dogs. She had a little screaming kid right behind the start peg so was very unsettled and she certainly isn't bullet proof yet and is very light on with trial experience and certainly recent trial experience. But still to have held it together as much as she did is certainly worth a brag .

Kenz did ok Xena but no pass as she decided to move all 4 feet when I left her for the COP - a first for her . Wasn't quite her normal standard but she didn't do badly either. Nobody passed novice so would have been the top scoring dog if we had opted to do stays and got through stays but given how unreliable her sit stay is I decided given she wasn't on a pass that we weren't going to attempt stays. Still pleased with how far she has come - a normal trial will never bother her again. We backed up again yesterday for the DWD demo after general specials and she had an absolute blast .

If you get stuck send me the MP3 and where you want it edited and i can do it and return MP3 edited .

no Kallistar she barked her way through the routine instead . My start worked, my ending worked although didn't quite time it exactly but least she couldn't bark while she was carrying something in her mouth .

Well we are back from our demo at the Royal - went ok except somebody had in a extra brand new set of batteries and was just feral . Never mind least she was enthusiastic and not scared of anything.

Audacity is what I use to edit my music.

It is written into the DogsSA constitution as a reportable offense Piper. Not sure what other states have in theirs.

Is this what your looking for corvus?? http://www.callicoma.com.au/leads1.htm#Mountain_double_ended_lead

x2 bedazzled

you tell me LOL. Kenz eventually got over her hate towards me after we stopped fetching and the chiro vet was much happier as there was less opportunity for her to injure herself , although that doesn't apparently stop her trashing herself and giving me heart attacks.

because a certain somebody told me to huski ;). I guess I was always a little worried when she would refuse any "reward" when I was training scent work with her other than being allowed to go out to the pile and retrieve another one and figured if things broke down I would have nothing to come back to. So I guess thats the merit in having the tug at least equal to if not ideally greater then the the value of the ring object. <This is all pre the TID stuff by the way>

Huski wrote: Am I the only one who sees a problem with releasing a dog to it's ultimate reward at the start of an exercise when you still need the dog to complete numerous other steps? That I guess would depend on what part of it the dog finds rewarding and sometimes you have no real choice. I had to put my seekback training on hold with Kenz when I was working through her OTT heelwork because there is no doubt to Kenz the reward of being sent to find the seekback held if not a greater value at least an equal value to that of her tug reward. I don't think with some dogs you honestly have a choice. You can build value for a reward but if the dog finds both equally rewarding hmmmm. Yep Kenz will tug enthusiastically after presenting her seekback or her DB but I would question whether the dog hasn't already been rewarded anyway. You could easily remove the tugging from the equation and the behavior would not weaken. Premak is hugely valuable in a ring situation I feel - whether in the end they are working for a reward at the end or not its the value for each exercise that keeps the motivation up during a round - especially in UD. All these opportunities to earn reinforcement in the ring for a dog who has value for things like jumping, articles, gloves, seekbacks. Whether you like it or not they do end up becoming reinforcing to the dog. The question I guess would be to what level and does that level override the reinforcement on offer. My view is with some dogs they do end up becoming at least equal and that isn't a bad thing. I guess its when the value of the object is significantly greater then the reward then you might have a problem.

Huski - Kenz has always had a huge value for her DB, scent articles, gloves - she has never run away with them the "value" to her is to complete the task as required else she loses the opportunity to complete the task. The retrieve to her is hugely rewarding and you probably know I struggled to get her to take a tug while the DB was even in sight. Like bedazzledx2 says - its the premak principle - dog doesnt do as requested dog doesn't get access to complete the task. Kenz certainly knows the difference between a formal fetch command when I want her to race out, grab the DB and come and sit in front versus an informal fetch command when I want her to race after the object and come sprinting back and put paws up on me. A dog can certainly learn a variable response with a particular item depending on the cue it hears. The dogs I were talking about that use "ring" items are as a reward are dogs who are trained in the exercises and already fluent. Presumably if the exercise started to break down then you would reintroduce a reward and you wouldn't then use that particular exercise as a reinforcer.

Not going to argue with you on that huski - it was more a case of being an example to highlight that you could if you wanted to get adequate value transfer to make something reinforcing that might not be a primary reinforcer i.e. food or tug. I don't care if my dog finds running around traffic cones reinforcing and she will take a tug if offered now but the behavior wouldn't reduce in intensity if it wasn't rewarded and I guess that makes something self rewarding. Maybe that is how they work with the DBs etc in the obedience. I haven't done it, well not deliberately I have had to work the other so that the dog will take a reward, so I don't know. I guess so long as when you still offer another reward and the dog takes it then your fine and can still repair behaviors as necessary.

I can come up with a classic example of pairing a secondary reinforcer with a primary reinforcer to the point where the secondary reinforcer is self rewarding and with something a dog wouldn't inherently consider reinforcing. I shaped my young BC to run around a traffic cone as a baby. We progressed the game through to trees and anything that I asked. I moved on to using 2 cones/objects and having her work figure 8s and other assorted variations. At some point in time the behavior came so valuable to the extent where she actually refused a primary reinforcer.

Toby sounds like Kenz RV. Stand was something she just didn't comprehend - we had remedial stand lessons with Sue guru when Kenz was 13 months . Hang in there he will get there and when in doubt book a remedial lesson with the guru. Loved your new little one RV she is going to be a star and she knows it .

wuffles here you go - http://endzonedogs.b...e-obstacle.html Kenz is interesting when we finished up at the end of last year she was a nothing suck - not that she didn't have value for the obstacles its just that she was responsive to body language. We never seemed to have typical off-course suck issues. Her first and only go in Excellent Jumping there was a super inviting tunnel and lots of dogs went into it but Kenz was so tuned into my body language that it never even entered the equation. I am not sure if that is the product of having done significant amounts of flatwork and foundation handling before putting the equipment into the picture. Has anybody else found this?

Aussielover - Susan Garrett would say you can transfer value so that the other activity becomes just as rewarding as the primary reinforcer. There are dogs who once trained in obedience are rewarded primarily with ring objects - dumbbells, gloves, scent articles, jumping. Its just about transfer of value. If you pair something enough with something the dog values then I do believe you get a value transfer and in some dogs that can be as rewarding as the primary reinforcer.

Another interested party.

JoeK wrote: Who saying your young girl has weak nerve, if the dog she train easy with good focus is doubtful she has weak nerve for the real? I am definitely sure the person saying it knows what they are talking about. She does but when working her desire for work now overrides anything else. I am sure if you look hard enough you will still found subtle differences in her work but touch wood the quality of her ring work has been of a higher quality then some of her training so we are definitely on the right path.

Kavik has hit the nail on the head - great post. In the end you work with the dog you have and in my experience if you start to label the dog then you are limiting its potential. You can fall into the trap of lowering your expectations to an extent where the dog is never challenged and never given the opportunity to grow. I wouldn't consider I have had to work any harder with my nervy dog in relation to training then I have with my more stable temperament (abet possibly slightly lower drive) dog and I know which one I would rather rely on to perform (and its the young one). She is the more enjoyable dog to work and train. Her focus level would outshine my older one hands down.

Not a bad looking "stud" dog you have there Ptolomy ;).