Koehler Training In Sydney?

[Kippy]

Who is talking about training entirely without corrections? Michael Ellis certainly isn't.

The general overview when someone talks about corrections or Koehler for example in this thread, many believe there is another way and corrections are not necessary at all often referring to sporting dogs supposedly trained in purely reward based systems?

[huski]

Who here has referred to using 'purely reward based systems'?

[Kavik]

Nowhere did I say that corrections are not necessary at all. In most of my posts I even stated that. The trainer most people have referred the OP to (K9Pro) does use corrections where appropriate.

The only trainer I referenced here that does not use corrections is the video of SG's recall with her puppy Swagger. SG can train like this due to her foundation work which concentrates on both drive and self control/impulse control. This does not mean that there are no consequences for incorrect choices her dogs make - there are. Positive does not mean permissive.

As far as I know the other trainers (Michael Ellis, Ivan Balabanov) do use corrections at times.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Kavik

[Kippy]

Nowhere did I say that corrections are not necessary at all. In most of my posts I even stated that. The trainer most people have referred the OP to (K9Pro) does use corrections where appropriate.

The only trainer I referenced here that does not use corrections is the video of SG's recall with her puppy Swagger. SG can train like this due to her foundation work which concentrates on both drive and self control/impulse control. This does not mean that there are no consequences for incorrect choices her dogs make - there are. Positive does not mean permissive.

As far as I know the other trainers (Michael Ellis, Ivan Balabanov) do use corrections at times.

Now we have established that, we shouldn't have a problem with Koehler then, case solved :D

[The Spotted Devil]

Who is talking about training entirely without corrections? Michael Ellis certainly isn't.

The general overview when someone talks about corrections or Koehler for example in this thread, many believe there is another way and corrections are not necessary at all often referring to sporting dogs supposedly trained in purely reward based systems?

I don't use physical or verbal corrections in obedience or agility. There are consequences though - removing access to rewards or stopping the 'game' altogether is a powerful consequence of not performing because I have built huge value for the 'game'. I don't use it much but it is a tool available to me. Retrieving trainers generally use negative reinforcement at the highest levels (e-collars) - I am training my youngster my way.....we will see where that gets us but I do believe some lateral and creative thinking will work. Earning titles is a human construct and my dogs don't care about ribbons. So I want them to be busting out of their skin with enthusiasm and confidence to work with me. There is no way you could get my Dally working in the ring with so much wagging attitude if you used corrections. It's not always as simple as rewards and corrections either. I could write on this all day!!! There is so much more to it including the human-canine bond etc but I'm away camping with my dogs so best I take them swimming and walking like I promised ;)

Edited December 12, 2011 by The Spotted Devil

[Kavik]

Nowhere did I say that corrections are not necessary at all. In most of my posts I even stated that. The trainer most people have referred the OP to (K9Pro) does use corrections where appropriate.

The only trainer I referenced here that does not use corrections is the video of SG's recall with her puppy Swagger. SG can train like this due to her foundation work which concentrates on both drive and self control/impulse control. This does not mean that there are no consequences for incorrect choices her dogs make - there are. Positive does not mean permissive.

As far as I know the other trainers (Michael Ellis, Ivan Balabanov) do use corrections at times.

Now we have established that, we shouldn't have a problem with Koehler then, case solved :D

Not sure how you can say I shouldn't have a problem with Koehler because I like the way Ellis and Balabanov train? They are very different.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Kavik

[megan_]

the operative word is "at times" and of course why the dog is getting the corrections. All corrections aren't equal.

[Weasels]

I don't use physical or verbal corrections in obedience or agility. There are consequences though - removing access to rewards or stopping the 'game' altogether is a powerful consequence of not performing because I have built huge value for the 'game'. I don't use it much but it is a tool available to me. Retrieving trainers generally use negative reinforcement at the highest levels (e-collars) - I am training my youngster my way.....we will see where that gets us but I do believe some lateral and creative thinking will work. Earning titles is a human construct and my dogs don't care about ribbons. So I want them to be busting out of their skin with enthusiasm and confidence to work with me. There is no way you could get my Dally working in the ring with so much wagging attitude if you used corrections. It's not always as simple as rewards and corrections either. I could write on this all day!!! There is so much more to it including the human-canine bond etc but I'm away camping with my dogs so best I take them swimming and walking like I promised ;)

I'm with TSD on this one, I don't use corrections in agility or trick training because I don't think it's warranted. What do I really care if they miss a jump? who's at risk? No-one.

I will use verbal corrections in herding however, since acting quickly and forcefully can mean the difference between a sheep running into a fence and breaking its neck or not. There is a real consequence here and the risk to the sheep's life outweighs the risk of the dog getting upset. Fortunately this is not necessary much these days.

What I worry about is a rigid program that doesn't take into account a dog's temperament, breed characteristics, daily variations in attitude and attention and so forth. I'd rather stop and figure out why a dog is or isn't responding in the way I'd like than jump straight to correction because it's part of a program.

But then maybe that's just because I'm not so good at following rules

Edited December 12, 2011 by Weasels

[gsdog2]

I'm with TSD on this one, I don't use corrections in agility or trick training because I don't think it's warranted. What do I really care if they miss a jump? who's at risk? No-one.

I will use verbal corrections in herding however, since acting quickly and forcefully can mean the difference between a sheep running into a fence and breaking its neck or not. There is a real consequence here and the risk to the sheep's life outweighs the risk of the dog getting upset. Fortunately this is not necessary much these days.

What I worry about is a rigid program that doesn't take into account a dog's temperament, breed characteristics, daily variations in attitude and attention and so forth. I'd rather stop and figure out why a dog is or isn't responding in the way I'd like than jump straight to correction because it's part of a program.

But then maybe that's just because I'm not so good at following rules

I think this comment says it all

The video showing Koehler training (apparently) reminds me of Obedience training 30 years ago

[Aidan3]

Nowhere did I say that corrections are not necessary at all. In most of my posts I even stated that. The trainer most people have referred the OP to (K9Pro) does use corrections where appropriate.

The only trainer I referenced here that does not use corrections is the video of SG's recall with her puppy Swagger. SG can train like this due to her foundation work which concentrates on both drive and self control/impulse control. This does not mean that there are no consequences for incorrect choices her dogs make - there are. Positive does not mean permissive.

As far as I know the other trainers (Michael Ellis, Ivan Balabanov) do use corrections at times.

Now we have established that, we shouldn't have a problem with Koehler then, case solved :D

Crikey, it's a long bow to draw if you're comparing Ellis, Balabanov, or even Kollenberg with Koehler

The video shown earlier is exactly what I was first taught. You'll never see a duller, less inspiring bunch of dogs than those trained that way. Just about anyone who was actually getting anywhere was doing something different. Reliable? Sure, if you don't mind waiting while the dog cringes it's way into position.

[gsdog2]

Crikey, it's a long bow to draw if you're comparing Ellis, Balabanov, or even Kollenberg with Koehler

The video shown earlier is exactly what I was first taught. You'll never see a duller, less inspiring bunch of dogs than those trained that way. Just about anyone who was actually getting anywhere was doing something different. Reliable? Sure, if you don't mind waiting while the dog cringes it's way into position.

Sorry to go OT but ..............

Sadly, there are clubs today who still train this way.

[Agility Dogs]

Crikey, it's a long bow to draw if you're comparing Ellis, Balabanov, or even Kollenberg with Koehler

The video shown earlier is exactly what I was first taught. You'll never see a duller, less inspiring bunch of dogs than those trained that way. Just about anyone who was actually getting anywhere was doing something different. Reliable? Sure, if you don't mind waiting while the dog cringes it's way into position.

Sorry to go OT but ..............

Sadly, there are clubs today who still train this way.

Happiest day of my (relatively short) dog training was the first time I returned to my dog and she didn't cringe. I'm not convinced that the behaviours we achieved with correction based training were any more reliable than the behaviours we have achieved with rewards based training.

My job is to make sure that my dogs don't get the opportunity to rehearse undesirable behaviours. If they do then I have not controlled the environment adequately or have pushed the dog too far too soon.

[gsdog2]

Happiest day of my (relatively short) dog training was the first time I returned to my dog and she didn't cringe. I'm not convinced that the behaviours we achieved with correction based training were any more reliable than the behaviours we have achieved with rewards based training.

My job is to make sure that my dogs don't get the opportunity to rehearse undesirable behaviours. If they do then I have not controlled the environment adequately or have pushed the dog too far too soon.

There is nothing like stepping out the back door and having your dog bounce around thinking 'this' might be a possible training session . I honestly don't remember my shepherds of years ago EVER reacting like that in the hope of a training session. I also don't remember in those days using food, a ball or a tug - it was either verbal praise or a tug on the checkchain

ETA The old methods may achieve some results but I have to say there is so much more enjoyment for ME in training now when I see how enthusiastic my dog is

Edited December 13, 2011 by gsdog2

[lovemesideways]

I just don't see how you can compare a dog like that poodle, to the 6 month old Mal! Such focus and drive, totally loving the game.

That is the sort of engagement I want from my puppy.

This is the level we're at now (ignoring my uncoordination with the new leather tug, only the 3rd time I've used it!)

At dog training, 2 friends standing right nearby with their dogs, a BBQ going on, results for the christmas raffle being called, dozens of people and their dogs barking and carrying on. Hes only 18 weeks old. And this is without correction. This is about building a dogs drive for a certain thing, in this case its a game of tug. We aren't a perfect example by any stretch of the imagination, but it just shows the power of the game for such a young dog and a fairly noob trainer like myself!

Why would you use a method that isn't fun for the dog, when you can train and have a great party of a time instead?

[RubyStar]

Loving the hat, LMS

My dogs turn themselves inside out for it to be their turn to train. I love when they get something wrong, they don't break down from fear they are going to be in trouble. They are happy and waggy and come bounding back to me to try again If your dog heels with body language that says they are frightened to be wrong, then you have to question why the heck you're training in the first place. My comments based on competition stuff obviously, general behavioural problems I won't comment on, I have no experience in that area.

[Kavik]

Great work LMSW! Well done getting that amount of focus and tugging in a busy environment

Edited December 13, 2011 by Kavik

[Kavik]

Nowhere did I say that corrections are not necessary at all. In most of my posts I even stated that. The trainer most people have referred the OP to (K9Pro) does use corrections where appropriate.

The only trainer I referenced here that does not use corrections is the video of SG's recall with her puppy Swagger. SG can train like this due to her foundation work which concentrates on both drive and self control/impulse control. This does not mean that there are no consequences for incorrect choices her dogs make - there are. Positive does not mean permissive.

As far as I know the other trainers (Michael Ellis, Ivan Balabanov) do use corrections at times.

Now we have established that, we shouldn't have a problem with Koehler then, case solved :D

Ellis does engagement work first before he teaches any behaviours - I posted a whole video on that! Engagement training is the opposite of what Koehler states he does at the beginning - as you said Koehler ignores the dog. Ellis uses food and toys to get engagement before training anything.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Kavik

[itsadogslife]

Ok, my first video wasn't a great success lol. I rushed it, didn't actually watch it properly and agree that it wasn't a great example. Obviously the dog wasn't ready for trialling. This next video is a better example of a Koehler trained dog. As you will see, the dog does not 'perform' with the same energy and drive as a Micheal Ellis trained dog. Some of us prefer this type of dog.

[itsadogslife]

Posted by Kavik Engagement training is the opposite of what Koehler states he does at the beginning - as you said Koehler ignores the dog. Ellis uses food and toys to get engagement before training anything.

No is isn't Kavik. Koehler gets engagement by ignoring the dog. If you saw the first week of training on the long line, you would clearly see the engagement (or attention as Koehler calls it) developing in the dog.

[Kavik]

Posted by Kavik Engagement training is the opposite of what Koehler states he does at the beginning - as you said Koehler ignores the dog. Ellis uses food and toys to get engagement before training anything.

No is isn't Kavik. Koehler gets engagement by ignoring the dog. If you saw the first week of training on the long line, you would clearly see the engagement (or attention as Koehler calls it) developing in the dog.

No it is not the same as engagement. With Koehler the dog learns to pay attention to where the handler is as sort of a background thing because if he doesn't he gets a pop on the leash. Engagement is having the dog engage with you actively in an activity (play/tug/food/running etc). Engagement requires the attention of the dog and handler be on each other (which ignoring is NOT) - requires work on the handlers part as well as the dog's.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Kavik