Koehler Training In Sydney?

[ursus]

If Koehler methods are so good the people who train service dogs would still be using them as their job is about saving human lives, keeping our country free from pests, not ribbons or the satisfaction of having a well trainind dog.

Many police dogs I have seen in real life or on TV shows do not show amazing training standards. For example many of them pull on the lead to the extent that the handler has to use his full strength to keep the dog around. So Koehler or not, this argument is not very strong.

[itsadogslife]

I don't agree with this. I believe if you give the dog a cue to a behaviour that has been generalised, it should perform it to the standard I have set be it in real life or in the trial ring.

But a dog that has been specifically trained to perform in drive in competition does not perform in drive on a casual walk.

Edited December 14, 2011 by itsadogslife

[Aidan3]

Of course it goes without saying that the judges are incompetent, the competition woefully poor, and no dog trained this way in Australia will ever do any good.

I've got to say, the score in the first video was very lenient, but I was impressed with the improvement made between the two videos.

[itsadogslife]

The standard of compliance you achieve with either method is your choice, it's got absolutely nothing to do with the method as I believe you can get consistant reliability using methods other than Koehler.

I agree. K9Pro for instance uses a training methodology of teach, train, proof. Pretty much the same methodology in principle as Koehler, so it doesn't surprise me that he would achieve consistent reliability.

[Aidan3]

A question: is maintaining the dog's focus for 10 minutes of ring action the same as getting him to pay attention for several hours of the walk?

No, but the learning principles are the same. If you cue a behaviour taught in drive on a two hour walk, you should expect to see a similar level of drive though; e.g I would let my dogs go off and explore in the bush, but they would always keep an ear and eye out for me, and if I called them they would come running at speed.

[OSoSwift]

I agree the dog did improve in the second video and that is probably the better video shown regarding Koehler training so far.

This is a youtube of a very well trained dog who is training under high distraction. He is being distracted by the things he does get rewarded with. Yes occassionally his attention does get drawn for a few seconds but he remains very focussed and does not move out of position. He is positive reinforcement trained.

This persons channel also inclused youtubes of him trialling.

Edited December 14, 2011 by OSoSwift

[fuzzy82]

The standard of compliance you achieve with either method is your choice, it's got absolutely nothing to do with the method as I believe you can get consistant reliability using methods other than Koehler.

I agree. K9Pro for instance uses a training methodology of teach, train, proof. Pretty much the same methodology in principle as Koehler, so it doesn't surprise me that he would achieve consistent reliability.

Teach, train, proof are just the phases of training, which all dog trainer students would learn. They would be the same no matter what training method you use. You teach the dog the behaviour and cue, then train the dog using the cue until it performs the behaviour reliably every time you ask, then you proof the behaviour using distractions. It doesn't matter if you used luring or shaping or corrections, the phases of training are always the same.

[m-j]

If Koehler methods are so good the people who train service dogs would still be using them as their job is about saving human lives, keeping our country free from pests, not ribbons or the satisfaction of having a well trainind dog.

Many police dogs I have seen in real life or on TV shows do not show amazing training standards. For example many of them pull on the lead to the extent that the handler has to use his full strength to keep the dog around. So Koehler or not, this argument is not very strong.

I have also seen it usually when they know they are about to go to work, maybe there is a reason for this. I would imagine if standing there quietly or LLW was beneficial to their job it would be taught, it's not like these things are hard to teach.

[Kavik]

The standard of compliance you achieve with either method is your choice, it's got absolutely nothing to do with the method as I believe you can get consistant reliability using methods other than Koehler.

I agree. K9Pro for instance uses a training methodology of teach, train, proof. Pretty much the same methodology in principle as Koehler, so it doesn't surprise me that he would achieve consistent reliability.

Teach, train, proof are just the phases of training, which all dog trainer students would learn. They would be the same no matter what training method you use. You teach the dog the behaviour and cue, then train the dog using the cue until it performs the behaviour reliably every time you ask, then you proof the behaviour using distractions. It doesn't matter if you used luring or shaping or corrections, the phases of training are always the same.

Exactly

Here is someone proofing their weave performance - does not mean they are using corrections or Koehler method ;) just testing the dog's understanding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V24s_nj-EOI&feature=player_embedded

Edited December 14, 2011 by Kavik

[Jumabaar]

Here is someone proofing their weave performance - does not mean they are using corrections or Koehler method ;) just testing the dog's uderstanding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V24s_nj-EOI&feature=player_embedded

WOW- ok I now I am really glad I got new weave poles. Motivated about weaving again- I wanna train my pups that well!!

Edited December 14, 2011 by Jumabaar

[Aidan3]

Here is someone proofing their weave performance - does not mean they are using corrections or Koehler method ;) just testing the dog's understanding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V24s_nj-EOI&feature=player_embedded

Haha, the first time I saw this I though "Oh too bad, he missed the tunnel", so it's fair to say that dog is better trained than me

[itsadogslife]

Posted by Fuzzy82 It doesn't matter if you used luring or shaping or corrections, the phases of training are always the same.

So what is the issue here? Do people here object to a dog being proof using corrections or not? Many people here say that they do not object to a dog being proofed with corrections. If so, then again, what is the issue?

[fuzzy82]

Posted by Fuzzy82 It doesn't matter if you used luring or shaping or corrections, the phases of training are always the same.

So what is the issue here? Do people here object to a dog being proof using corrections or not? Many people here say that they do not object to a dog being proofed with corrections. If so, then again, what is the issue?

Your post said you would expect any dog that has gone through the phases of teach, train, proof to be reliable. I pointed out that it doesn't matter which method you use, you would always go through the same phases. Even if you don't use corrections, the phases are the same. I personally don't think corrections are necessary for proofing.

[Aidan3]

Posted by Fuzzy82 It doesn't matter if you used luring or shaping or corrections, the phases of training are always the same.

So what is the issue here? Do people here object to a dog being proof using corrections or not? Many people here say that they do not object to a dog being proofed with corrections. If so, then again, what is the issue?

What is your real life experience with Koehler method, itsadogslife? It's a fair question. As you say, not many people actually do it, but a lot of people have strong opinions on the method.

ETA: please don't take the question the wrong way, I'm not trying to "call you out" on anything but to get a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Edited December 14, 2011 by Aidan2

[itsadogslife]

Posted by Aidan2 What is your real life experience with Koehler method, itsadogslife? It's a fair question. As you say, not many people actually do it, but a lot of people have strong opinions on the method.

I have trained one dog in my life, a Hungarian Vizla. He died suddenly from illness a couple of months ago. I did not trial him for reason of work and other commitments and due to the fact that I am not that interested in dog competition. I have recently acquired a Kelpie pup from rescue up in the country. I have plans to start (formally) training him in the new year.

My Hungarian Vizsla was a beautiful, soft, lovely dog. The Koehler Method allowed me, a complete novice to train him without help into a well behaved reliable dog to whom I spent many hours enjoyable walking him off lead all the while knowing him would come when call, heel when asked, sit, stay, drop, fetch etc etc.

The notion that this dog, was in any way frightened, fearful or harmed by the methods I used is so foreign to my experience with him that I really do wonder why people have such an interest in denying the average dog owner (like myself) a perfectly good, simple method, specifically developed over 16 years and 11,000 dogs with a proven track record of bringing reliability.

But then again, almost every single person that I have found who objects to the method has never used it.

[itsadogslife]

I personally don't think corrections are necessary for proofing.

Whereas I, following the Koehler method to the letter, have never corrected my dog unless necessary - which if done correctly, is seldom.

[OSoSwift]

But then again, almost every single person that I have found who objects to the method has never used it.

I have used it and trained it and I do not think it is a good way of training a dog and none of my current dogs have been trained that way.

One of my others was then we changed and got a far happier more confident dog ho actually retrieved a dumbell after 4 years of trying with the Koehler method. After we got past the mental blocks it took about 6 months to get the complete behaviour reliable from start to finish. I even had someone who had trained koehler for a lot longer than me and was apparently a very very good trainer fail to get my girl to retrieve. I was told she wasn't a retrieving breed and therefore I was pushing the proverbial up a hill with a very skinny stick.

Interestingly retrieving became one of her favourite behaviours.

[Aidan3]

But then again, almost every single person that I have found who objects to the method has never used it.

Sorry for your loss, sounds like you had a great dog and a great bond.

I think the main problem comes from Koehler's problem behaviour modification methods, which were harsh by any account. The long-line training can be very gentle, particularly with a biddable dog. As with anything, how the "method" turns out will depend partly on the trainer, and partly on the dog.

[itsadogslife]

Posted by OsoSwift I have used it and trained it

Did you train it exactly as instructed from the book?

One of my others was then we changed and got a far happier more confident dog ho actually retrieved a dumbell after 4 years of trying with the Koehler method.

This sounds highly unlikely to me that you were using the method correctly. You may have been, but it does make me wonder.

I even had someone who had trained koehler for a lot longer than me and was apparently a very very good trainer fail to get my girl to retrieve. I was told she wasn't a retrieving breed and therefore I was pushing the proverbial up a hill with a very skinny stick.

This makes me even less likely to believe that you were being instructed properly. There is not a (proper) Koehler trainer on the planet that would ever say "she wasn't a retrieving breed" as an excuse for their inability to train.

[itsadogslife]

Posted Aidan2 I think the main problem comes from Koehler's problem behaviour modification methods, which were harsh by any account.

I agree they are very harsh. But then, if you follow Koehler's instructions for fixing problem behaviours 99% of dogs will never require such harsh measures as found in the second half of the book.

Personally, I cannot imagine raising a dog from a puppy how one would ever need to employ such harsh methods. But then I am not a professional trainer, and I don't have to deal with incompetent owners so foolish to allow such behaviors to arise in the first place.