wheres my rock Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 hmmm not good on expadning things in words I started by breaking the exercise into componenets and the component we needed to fix was the go out not he already had done the box and i used to hold him between my legs rev him up then release him and let him run out and click for the take of so with the retrieve i started with the same priciple held him back threw food then said are ready read go release and as he took of clicked of course he grabbed the food then came back and go an extra reward then once had th idea right in my head i held him and threw a ball revved him up said ready ready goo released and clicked as he took of my dog then tunrns for the treat hes not retrieve mad i vared the distance sometimes clicking straight away others waiting till he got to the ball then others after he picked up did it about twenty times over a few days then i threw the DB and just did a couple of take offs and from then on he took off Does that make sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Yeah I think I see where you're going with that - might give it a try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 I think you raise a good point LP- i know many people who aren't able to just give the correction and 'move on' and hence, the dogs work absolutely suffers. LP, don't you think you can look for the good and the bad- its not a matter of exclusively looking for one or the other? "I've never really had a situation where the consequences were of no importance..... maybe i'm lucky" I think that you are lucky OR i think its more likely that you do have those situations but as you said, you just choose to go back a step. I would love for you to have seen and dealt with Georgie when we first got her or even now and get a perspective on what you would have done- not to crticise just out of interest. She is a unique and very difficult dog and i had never seen anything like her previously. She would have been a great dog to show consequences of no importance! Extending this further- Can you teach an initially unmotivated dog to enjoy a sport that they may not enjoy initially? To give an example, Georgie, our newest dog i'm sure will be quite frightened of certain aspects of agility to begin with. However, i'm also confident that she will learn to love it as soon as she knows what to do. Under some theories though- would i not do agility because the dog doesn't like some aspects at this point? (i'm not talking about corrections at all just to clarify) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopuppy04 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I think you raise a good point LP- i know many people who aren't able to just give the correction and 'move on' and hence, the dogs work absolutely suffers. LP, don't you think you can look for the good and the bad- its not a matter of exclusively looking for one or the other? Yes, you are right - you can look for the good and the bad, but I do find IME, that *many* tend to get focussed on one thing only...... perhaps it is poor instruction on their part but I do see a lot that will correct effectively and well timed, but miss perfect opportunities to reward simply because 'the dog is doing what it is supposed to do'. I try and encourage the other way around - reward when the dog is doing 'what it is supposed to do' and try and 'ignore' to a degree the misbehaviour. Don't get me wrong though - many people *still* miss plenty of opportunities to reward I would love for you to have seen and dealt with Georgie when we first got her or even now and get a perspective on what you would have done- not to crticise just out of interest. She is a unique and very difficult dog and i had never seen anything like her previously. She would have been a great dog to show consequences of no importance! She sounds like an interesting dog! I don't know what I would do in certian situations..... sometimes you never know until you are presented with the problem! Extending this further- Can you teach an initially unmotivated dog to enjoy a sport that they may not enjoy initially? To give an example, Georgie, our newest dog i'm sure will be quite frightened of certain aspects of agility to begin with. However, i'm also confident that she will learn to love it as soon as she knows what to do. Under some theories though- would i not do agility because the dog doesn't like some aspects at this point? (i'm not talking about corrections at all just to clarify) I think you can - but then, you just said yourself, that you aren't talking about corrections. The dog, although initially fearful of something can be taught to absolutely LOVE it because of the rewards it gets. The feeling of pleasure can over-ride the initial feelings that they had for it.... re-conditioning to a degree. I believe this is what the 'click to calm' method is based on - I have not yet done any work on it, but am keen to see/ hear responses about it. Isn't that why for many dogs, the obstacle that they feared the most will soon become their most loved obstacle? What I do see as wrong however was if, say for example you were to 'correct' a fearful dog for not doing an obstacle when they are unsure of it - not that the people involved in this discussion would! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheres my rock Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 agility is about confdence and that would be good for her yes you can make it fun by making sure she gets huge rewards every step of the way so that even though the dog wak might be big and scarey she gets oodles of hwatever she loves for going near it then putting fot on it etc. My whippet was terriefied of heights not sure why but after a while he learned to love agility also you need equipment that cmes apart and goes reallsmall so nothing is daunting find her comfort zone then go from there. I think working on agility or a retrieve with a dog that isnt into it is fine just not earpinching or trying to force the dog through something that would be unfair Ive taught a few non retrieving dogs to love to retrieve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lablover Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 What an excellent thread. Many awesome trainers, who have been leaders in their field, have all said to me, - my greatest strength is looking outside my square. And having a very supportive husband. LOL. I love love love debating, even though not necessarily agreeing with trainers I have a high opinion of. I might not think they are right but will spend many DAYS trying to marry their views with mine. Language barriers aside. As well as DESCRIPTIONS, as many are "meaning" the same style but .................. I can talk about training for hours, and hours and hours. Even in my sleep. Every trainer who has helped me, hovers on my right shoulder. I remember them all, and their advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 What about flooding a dog through a tunnel? We would definitely have to do that with Georgie the first time she faces it- does that mean that because we can't motivate her to go through the tunnel on her own that we shouldn't do it? I have seen a number of dogs flooded appropriately through tunnels who end up LOVING it. We had to flood Georgie over steps because there was no other way for her to get into the house if she wouldn't deal with stairs (we have them at front and back door) She would still be outside and scared of everything to this day if we hadn't forced her to deal with some of her issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I think I am very open minded to any aspect of training, I think it stems from a stubborn streak when I was told my ACD would NEVER enter a trail ring( red rag to a bull) I don't know if I'd have been so receptive to some of the methodologies I learnt/tried if he'd been non dog aggro, although I had to re learn my ways and learn to trust our bitch more as she was to become a perfect girl..hard to say if I was always open minded or it manifested from determination to get Tollies titles. Regardless od how it came about, I'm glad I am receptive to other ideas and motivaters as it opens a whole world of possibilites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheres my rock Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 would depend on you meaning of flooding and hw it was done going over the steps was importat to access the house running through an agility tunnel isnt important but like i sad depends on how it was done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayreovi Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 (edited) My theory is to give anything go at least once within reason. If it works great, if it doesnt well never mind, but least i tried and can say that, that method didnt work for that dog. ETA: I will always listen too people offering advice, depending on what the advice is i may follow through, if i dont like the method i would go thanks but no thanks. I know the limitations of my dogs and what will wreck them as apposed too making them better. Edited March 30, 2007 by tollersowned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 I realise that an agility tunnel has little importance in the scheme of things and didn't mean to compare it to getting the dog in the house. When i refer to flooding through a tunnel i am talking about forcing the dog through a short tunnel- obviously lots of reward at the end. I guess what i am getting at with this line of thought is the prospect or potential to deny a dog from something that they are likely to enjoy and benefit from in terms of confidence and dealing with fear (and having fun to a lesser extent)- just because there will be some stress to begin with. Doesn't any kind of training produce a degree of stress? And while i definitely don't agree with pushing a dog into a sport that they won't enjoy just for the human benefit, there are many dogs who begin not enjoying something and through a number of different techniques- including positive reward, flooding and appropriate corrections (not in agility) learn to love it. There seem to be some people who believe that those dogs should not be persisted with or tried under a different technique and i find that interesting. Think about a person who is afraid of something and no amount of incentive will have them conquer the fear. They get pushed into it once and get the promised incentive (that was previously of no value- but became valuable once they had completed the 'exercise') and realise that nothing bad happened AND they got something great. I think that also increases the value of the motivator, as you don't have fear/ anxiety cancelling it out the next time. So you can actually increase enthusiasm and drive despite using a degree of compulsion. What are your thoughts on this concept? And yes i know dogs are not people but i think its a good analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopuppy04 Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 What about flooding a dog through a tunnel? We would definitely have to do that with Georgie the first time she faces it- does that mean that because we can't motivate her to go through the tunnel on her own that we shouldn't do it? I have seen a number of dogs flooded appropriately through tunnels who end up LOVING it. You raise excellent points Cosmolo. On the most part, IME flooding a dog through a tunnel is fine.... but as always - it all comes down to the dogs. There have been dogs that have come out worse for wear from going through the tunnel and becoming positively phobic of it because of trying to be forced through. Perhaps the 'trainer' wasn't flooding correctly.... but in all honesty, I don't have a problem with it - it is the same as 'flooding' a dog over the A frame - sometimes it is the best way for them to overcome their fears. As LL said - I think everybody should keep an open mind about ALL training methods - to blanket one in or out, simply means you are shortening your expertise, not to mention, there will without doubt, if you are training long enough, come a time where you simply cannot use positive methods or corrective methods on a particular dog. Currently, I find that 'positive' methods work wonders for my two, but i'm not denying that I may come across a dog that will thrive better on corrective training than positive.... just like some kids thrive on being told 'positive' things, while others thrive on being 'disciplined'.... If you say you are all against one particular method IMO, you'll eventually draw a short straw and have to eat your words... don't ya think? So Cosmolo - do you see yourself as open minded?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogdude Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 (edited) I use corrective and persuasive methods where I see necessary. That includes the forced retreive, which just happens to be my dogs favorite exercise. Just because a dog has been trained using the FR, doesn't mean he is being bullied every time he performs it. The dog is still encouraged with positives for making the right choice, and quickly learns to love it. Dogs that work great in the ring but not outside it are just pattern trained, it is not the dogs personality you are seeing when that happens, ......its the trainers! I think that if you train a dog to see obedience as a game, they will treat every command that you give them as a game. There should be no difference IMO. Of course a dog should still be pumped with excitement to do well in the ring, which of course is not really possible without the positive reinforcement or drive aspect. Mind you, the FR is the only exercise where I would use aversive methods to actually teach an exercise, and the other times I will use it for correcting unacceptable bad behavior (but not "wrong choice") in some circumstances. I am intensely interested in all forms of training, and atm into learning the nitty gritty of the techniques of some of the "motivational masters". Edited March 30, 2007 by dogdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCNTC Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I am pretty open minded, my own dogs all need entirly differnt training methods, so if I was not open minded I would only have 1/7 trained dogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 I recently had a dog that 'tested' my open minded-ness hence the topic. I used something i rarely use and it achieved a great result for the owner- reminding me tha being open minded and thinking outside the square is really important. I try to be as open minded as possible and feel that if a client asked me to train a certain way, i could absolutely do so- for example if a client wanted to clicker train, i know i could teach them and teach them well even though its not something i use in my own training at this stage. There is one thing that i am hesitant to compromise on though- and thats my attitude toward mouthing in puppies. Someone would have to make an excellent case for me to ever go back to extinction training (because of the reasons i mention in a previous post in this thread) Just for the record, when i trained in Perth, i was a 'purely positive' trainer- with little understanding of other techniques. I worked with a group of positive/ clicker trainers who i credit with sparking my obsession with training and i still consider them to be really good trainers. But i wanted to understand every technique, and then make a choice as to what i use. The first time someone asked me to give a correction i refused! But then opened up to learning and i'm glad i did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheres my rock Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 (edited) ok see i would still get the tunnel and the retrieve i would choose not to use force but still get the results and quickly i was after so i wouldnt say just dont teach it thast the difference i guess I was forced to face a fear once not only was the experience traumatic i never spoke to the person again and gave up a sport i was once addicted too Edited March 30, 2007 by wheres my rock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted March 31, 2007 Author Share Posted March 31, 2007 WMR- what i am suggesting is that there is no way to motivate the dog to go through the tunnel on their own. Is it your opnion that you would then not do agility with that dog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 (edited) With your example of an unwilling dog through a tunnel - I agree that there is a degree of "flooding" if the dog is "forced". However, the way I see it, there is a difference here than to the true technical sense of "flooding". My understanding of "flooding" is to keep the animal in the situation it fears until such time as the fear abates. With the "tunnel" example the dog has an option of 'escape' and although this involves having to go through the tunnel (assuming it cannot return via the entrance due to eg. body blocking), it is a conscious decision by the dog to continue on as this is the only choice (save for staying where it is) the dog has. The act of having made the decision, and the subsequent "win" the dog receives as a result, serves to increase its confidence and I feel this is where and why there is such a high and quick degree of success in this method in this example. If it were "true" flooding, the dog wouldn't be allowed escape and it is here that there is the very real potential risk of sensitisation occurring. These are just my thoughts, my take, on the subject. :D Having said the above: My interpretation of "force" in this example is not one of dragging the dog through the tunnel by eg. the lead. (Just incase others interpret the word to effect a different meaning/vision.) Rather the "force" is only by removing one choice (ie backing out or avoiding the tunnel altogether) but giving the dog the option of two remaining choices. That is, to stay put or to go forward. I have had some dogs where additional encouragement to go forward has been required, but none where any efforts to this end have been unsuccessful. I can therefore only base my opiinion on my own experience. I've forgotten what the original question was with regards to the "forcing through tunnel" example given, so forgive me if I've gone off track with my comments. It's been a big week and a big day and I'm in for a very early night tonight!!! Edited March 31, 2007 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonymc Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Erny,I have to agree fully with your perception of true Flooding.We will sometimes use forms of Flooding with Horses too. Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheres my rock Posted March 31, 2007 Share Posted March 31, 2007 Couldnt tell you i would have to see the dog i beleve there is always way to motivate a dog maybe its too soon maybe you ned to build more trust dont know i havent seen the dog or tha handler but i wouldnt start with a tunnel i''d make it simpler and set it up in way that the dog will gain confidence and success think outside the square it would be done at home in the backyard where the dog feels confident. but this is going way off track to being open minded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now