Purely Positive Results

[JulesP]

The main reason that I don't have a problem with some level of negative correction is that dogs negatively correct each other. Therefore I think that they do accept some level of negative correction and do understand it.

[wheres my rock]

im talking about 15 years ago when pretty much everyone just used jerk and pull these days i dont see it as much

I dont care wht method someone uses so lon as they dont tell me im wrong for choosing what i choose and i hate the whoe the collar speaks of cruelty epople choose a collar they feel comfortable using ive heard that if you have a chain your cruel comment its stupid

as for clickers i havent had tht one but then noone else uss one at our club so i guess it wouldnt matter but i use a verbal marker anyway at club as i usually have my hands full.

Te only time ive said soemthing is when a dog is being dragged by the ears or severely corrected or strung up for something stupid like dropping on a sit stay then i will state my feelings as not only do i think its cruel i dont think ts appropriate to do that sort of thing in a club environment where we have a duty of care to the animals and people who go there

[wheres my rock]

back on topic

I can think of at least a dozen trianers that use postive reward based training and have achieved hight levels of competition obedience and i havent really been involved in the obedience word for a while so im sure there area lot more

[leopuppy04]

another example is a CDODC lady that I train with. She got her BC at around 12 mths and has since trained it to UD level - all positive..... in the space of around 18mths - 2yrs I think.

That includes acquiring, bonding, training and then trialling

very, VERY good trainer

[wheres my rock]

and theres sara with the aussie her poodle cross did very well didnt it

and a guy from croydon and kintala his golden got novice and open he strted a lot later i dont know if hes trialling in ud but ive seen he dog work so if he isnt its purely age hats stopped him

Also the girl that won novice at the royal wit the powderpuff and a score of 190 something

[wheres my rock]

and what about the perthses that sally is involved with they have chived countless titles using pp havent they

Wasnt one of the top dog cmpetitors a pp trianer i dont know her but i was told she is gsd lady

Edited May 2, 2007 by wheres my rock

[ness]

Perthies hhmmmmmm...

- Gina O'Keefe (3 poodles - 2 Standards and a Toy and now in agility with her Borrowed BCs)

- Sue Hogben (Goldie, BCs, tollers)

- Sandi Gee (tollers)

- Cathy Snook (toller)

(and they are just some of the names like I said most dogs over there would be being trained using positives)

[leopuppy04]

and theres sara with the aussie her poodle cross did very well didnt it

Yep - her poodle x got her CD in 4 trials and this dog is not an easy one to train.

I heard from her this weekend that her aussie won in his first obedience trial in NZ! Their criteria is a LOT harder than here - particularly in terms of heeling - apparently they don't want to see daylight between you and the dog !

and a guy from croydon and kintala his golden got novice and open he strted a lot later i dont know if hes trialling in ud but ive seen he dog work so if he isnt its purely age hats stopped him

Is that Benson (dog's name?). It's a lovely Goldie and works brilliantly - he has a younger Goldie also (that I want to steal) and she works great also.,

But off the top of my head- some pro trainers that have done well using positives are

*Richard Curtis

*Greg Derrett

*Kay Laurence..

[Arya]

Here's what I think. I am all for use of positive methods wherever possible. After all, we want our dogs to want to work for us and enjoy working for us. How can this be if we correct them into it? BUT, I also believe that positive punishment, when used wisely, is a highly important part of training many dogs. Note WISELY. I guess I fall somewhere in the middle. I'll always use positive methods and NRM where possible but it simply is not enough with some dogs and some behaviours imho. I think it depends on the dog you have. If speaking just about my own dogs, my last little dog, you couldn't dare raise your voice in the house or he ran and hid (I'm serious), so everything had to be positive with him and he just didn't challenge. My GSD bitch I've got now - a whole other ball game. Positive cxns essential at times, when used wisely. I think there's a place for all methods and the method chosen should be the one that fits the dog's temperament.

[leopuppy04]

Interesting Arya - part of me agrees with you.

But I also have some theories i'd like to test..... one day I should get out the worst behaved dog in the history of the world and see if I can succeed with positive training....... I just have some theories and ideas that run around in my head but I don't know whether or not they would work..... lol

[wheres my rock]

my first dog came to me dog aggressive very naughty and he would ignore everyone he was strung up by an instructor and that was the day i turned to positive trinaing withing six months fromt he day he came home he was trialling in novice a year later he had cdx ad and was inud

My second dog came to me as a night mare seven trianers had tried and given up she had been quoted as untrainable very domninat aggressive and maybe even deaf lol this was assesed by a professional

within a year she was competing in ud and she was hard she also got her beginner retrieving certificate great dog once you understod her.

My whippet was independent and not into food or fetching he could run so fast if he took of he'd be gone in a second yet again with positive trianing he was ready for open unfrtunately he died before we got to trial him

most of our dgs have been second hand so i can vouch that used correctly it can work and you can develop an eager working dog

I find it interesting that epople will quickly say you need to find the method to suit the dog actually you need to fine tune the method to suit the dog but if you truly undrstand the method you are using and listen to the dog and get inside his head any method can work for any dog just as well Its the handler that has to trust in their tools

Have a look at the very soft sensitive dogs that are trialling that have very heavy handd handlers i often wonder how they can get such good results using hard correction on a soft dog ts because they know their method they know when to push and when to back off.

[Lablover]

Here's what I think. I am all for use of positive methods wherever possible.

I agree.

One of the youngsters I placed in another home, was trained without a lead or collar, all positive. She would have breezed through obedience trials.

She simply did not have enough crazy desire when the going got tough, long retrieves on rocky ground being one example.

Just as a highly motivated/driven dog can be motivated to a high degree. A moderately motivated/driven dog can be motived to a moderate degree.

I also prefer dogs who are not on the go for 24 hours a day, like some poor keplies or border collies from working lines, in suburban homes which may be suit. Having on off switch is important.

Thats why I like high end dogs. Easy to motivate, easy to train. Easy to drive.

Well, off I go for a week of training away from home. See you next week.

[m-j]

Sue Hogben (Goldie, BCs, tollers)

Aussie Shepherds also. She has OC dogs, as has a friend of mine.

My achievements with the one and only positive dog was Open, with much better results than with my traditionally trained dog. It was harder to proof but the long term results were better and there isn't as much maintenance training is what I have found.

Another thing is the breeds that were traditionally hard to train (bull terriers is one breed I have trained both ways) are a piece of cake to teach with positive motivational methods. I was really convinced to go positive though when I had my Karabash (a rescue) it was a safer way for me to get her to learn something She really didn't like being pushed around initially she had been taught that if i growl (most of her teeth showing) people back of and she wasn't worried about upping the ante if she felt she needed to. She turned into a much loved pet and trusted us completely and we her, I'm pretty sure that would not have been the case if I had continued to traditionally train her.

another example is a CDODC lady that I train with. She got her BC at around 12 mths and has since trained it to UD level - all positive..... in the space of around 18mths - 2yrs I think.

Yep my friend has achieved that with her 2 dogs she has trained using positives. I take my hat off to her for trying as she was also very successful with traditional training.

Most of the dogs that are going through the ring these days as compared to even 10 yrs ago are working much better, particually in the novice/encouragement rings.

Just my humble opinion

cheers

M-J

[Staranais]

I don't see why you couldn't use "almost" purely positive methods to train most dogs in obedience (e.g. the only punishment being things like denying the dog a reward, or ignoring the dog). All you'd need to do would be to figure out what really motivates your dog, and then make his obtaining it contingent on him performing for you. I wouldn't be suprised if many people have trained their dogs to very high levels using "almost" purely postive alone. It's an interesting idea for a thread. :D

I think it's sometimes a different thing when retraining adult dogs with already established behavioural problems, though. That's just my personal experience, and I admit we might be a rare case. All I know is that when I first got my current dog, I took him to a few positive-only training schools, and his behaviour around other dogs actually got worse - although he did learn to play along to earn rewards when he was in the mood, he also learned that he could indulge in aggressive tantrums whenever he liked without any real consequences. Only with a combination of reward and punishment has his behaviour been improving around other dogs (and yes, he's still a keen and happy worker).

Like Arya, I don't think that using verbal or physical punishment, fairly and in moderation, is a bad or morally wrong thing. Abusing a dog is another matter, of course. But I've talked to some trainers who think that even saying "uh-uh" to your dog is abusive, and personally, I find that kind of silly.

[leopuppy04]

I don't see why you couldn't use "almost" purely positive methods to train most dogs in obedience (e.g. the only punishment being things like denying the dog a reward, or ignoring the dog). All you'd need to do would be to figure out what really motivates your dog, and then make his obtaining it contingent on him performing for you. I wouldn't be suprised if many people have trained their dogs to very high levels using "almost" purely postive alone. It's an interesting idea for a thread. :D

If that is "almost" purely positive - may I ask for you definition of 'purely positive' please - only coz IMO to get anywhere in training you will have to withold the reward .... otherwise the dog is not learning anything.....

My definition of 'positive training' is that no physical or verbal punishment is administered - simply a NRM/witholding the treat/or ignoring is used.... but that is just me

I think that adult dogs could still be trained with +ve methods...... I think the 'click to calm' method is highly successful and as you say - dogs will work for what motivates them and I think even with the most dominant dog, positive methods will work with a bit of NILIF (you control all the good things!). JMHO - but as I said - i'd like to try it one day

Like Arya, I don't think that using verbal or physical punishment, fairly and in moderation, is a bad or morally wrong thing. Abusing a dog is another matter, of course. But I've talked to some trainers who think that even saying "uh-uh" to your dog is abusive, and personally, I find that kind of silly.

Definately agree with you there - saying 'no' to a dog is not abusive and I find it difficult to comprehend how they will gain proper control by always teaching the dog an alternative...... especially for general manners.... again JMHO

[piper]

I love the way as soon s we start talkign about not correcting everyone tries to pick it to pieces oh but this could be +punishment this doesnt fit any experienced trainer which most of you are know exactly what we mean when we talk about pure positive trianing we dont jerk our dogs drag our dogs force our dogs yell at our dogs in other words we dont reprimand incrrect we set up for success reward correct behaviour and have a whole lot of fun in the process well thast my definition of a pp trianer

I cant think how else to explain it but youve read the books seen epople trinaing i think you know what we mean throwing around tonnes of terminology isnt doing anything but trying to look smart

so how many people have gained titles with the above philosophy

Good description

With that philosophyI have 1 dog with an AD JD CD and HSAs, 1 with an ADX and 1 with an AD. The 1 with multiole titles should have mire but as Ness will agree to it actually involves me ENTERING trials. lol She got 4 passes of her ADX in 5 or 6 trials, that was over 2 years ago since then I have hardly bothered training her (personal reasons) and only entered 2 trials, 1 of which all she did was knock the last bar. So the lack of higher level titles on Piper is only because of me not bothering to compete. I'm not a competitve person, I love training and teaching new things but competiton really doesnt inteterst me that much.

Based on what someone eelse said though about manners outside of the ring my 3 all have that. Piper in particular has a fantastic recall and will respond to commands without requiring treats in very distracting environments, such as being off lead on stand at the Pet Expo for 3 days and except for following 1 person carrying a nice bag of dog treats never went anywhere and on the occasion she went walk about recalled back through the pavillion and crowds of people.

[Staranais]

If that is "almost" purely positive - may I ask for you definition of 'purely positive' please - only coz IMO to get anywhere in training you will have to withold the reward .... otherwise the dog is not learning anything.....

My answer is that I personally don't think there really is such a thing as "purely" positive training, since like you say, all training must include aspects of punishment. I think calling any training "purely" positive is kind of misleading, since the trainer will still be punishing the dog by withholding rewards, withholding attention, putting the dog in time out, maybe giving NRMs, etc.

I think the 'click to calm' method is highly successful and as you say - dogs will work for what motivates them and I think even with the most dominant dog, positive methods will work with a bit of NILIF (you control all the good things!). JMHO - but as I said - i'd like to try it one day

But what if fighting (or the adrenaline rush from fighting) is the best motivator for a particular dog? It's not exactly something you can make the dog work for, it's something you never ever want the dog to do. And although in this situation you can teach and reward alternative behaviours until the cows come home, if you never reduce the value of the predatory/aggressive behaviour with some sort of aversive, then what's to stop the dog indulging in it whenever he has the opportunity? And as long as you're also constantly reinforcing correct behaviour, then what's so wrong with using a correction to show the dog that particular behaviours simply won't be tolerated? (I don't want to hijack this thread, so Leopuppy, please feel free to respond via PM instead of posting here in response. I have read & attempted to use the Click to Calm book, and am always interested in informed discussions about dog-dog aggression, since it's pretty much an ongoing challenge for us.)

[leopuppy04]

I think the 'click to calm' method is highly successful and as you say - dogs will work for what motivates them and I think even with the most dominant dog, positive methods will work with a bit of NILIF (you control all the good things!). JMHO - but as I said - i'd like to try it one day :p

But what if fighting (or the adrenaline rush from fighting) is the best motivator for a particular dog? It's not exactly something you can make the dog work for, it's something you never ever want the dog to do. And although in this situation you can teach and reward alternative behaviours until the cows come home, if you never reduce the value of the predatory/aggressive behaviour with some sort of aversive, then what's to stop the dog indulging in it whenever he has the opportunity? And as long as you're also constantly reinforcing correct behaviour, then what's so wrong with using a correction to show the dog that particular behaviours simply won't be tolerated? (I don't want to hijack this thread, so Leopuppy, please feel free to respond via PM instead of posting here in response. I have read & attempted to use the Click to Calm book, and am always interested in informed discussions about dog-dog aggression, since it's pretty much an ongoing challenge for us.)

Only slightly and I'd like to hear other peoples responses.

I honestly can't answer your question to the full extend due to my lack of expertise in this particular area. All I am going by is 'theories' and 'heresay' and not by personal experience .

Sometimes the adrenaline from fighting is the best motivator - that can also mean that a punisher can also not work. The dog couldn't care less lets say - in the worse case scenario - about the electric shock you give it simply because the behaviour it is producing is so rewarding to itself. When there are high levels of adrenaline, we know that any animals pain receptors are pretty much 'inactive' until after the event.... so they may actually not even respond to it. Some may even heighten their aggression because of it (like punching and yelling at someone to get the revved for a boxing match). Hence, I am always a little skeptical about using it in that scenario simply because of the implications that may occur - but I'm not denying that it can and will work.

For me - and not having done this personally in action, but having watched others do it - I find that if you work at a distance where your dog won't react and reward accordingly (they are aware of the stimulus but not responding) - this will work far better than putting your dog in a situation where it may react albeit mildly and recieve a correction. Dogs respond better to get what they want and I do believe that it can work...... but as I said - I have not personally had to deal with this.....

Edited May 3, 2007 by leopuppy04

[Kavik]

I like the Click to Calm book, and have used aspects of it with Zoe and Kaos. I find especially with Zoe who is aggressive, that she is much better if I am calm. Correcting her for aggressive behaviour (or even trying to scare off a loose dog by yelling etc) makes her MUCH worse. Using the Click to Calm book has helped me to find a way to stay calmer when dealing with Zoe's aggression and has helped to get her to focus on me when she sees another dog. She is not anywhere near as good as I would like - she doesn't get to meet other dogs and I don't take her to classes. She is still a bugger with other dogs. But walking her has become more pleasant.

BTW I am not a positve only trainer - just wanted to comment on click to calm and aggression since we were there

[Arya]

I find it interesting that epople will quickly say you need to find the method to suit the dog actually you need to fine tune the method to suit the dog but if you truly undrstand the method you are using and listen to the dog and get inside his head any method can work for any dog just as well Its the handler that has to trust in their tools

Have a look at the very soft sensitive dogs that are trialling that have very heavy handd handlers i often wonder how they can get such good results using hard correction on a soft dog ts because they know their method they know when to push and when to back off.

I respectfully disagree If we stick to one method alone, we may not be doing the dog any favours. Purely positive simply doesn't work with some dogs I've worked with. It is not enough. Not every method works for every dog, in my experience. I don't quickly say you need to find the method to suit the dog, I say that from hard-won experience. Now if you do look at those soft dogs trialling that have heavy handed handlers, if you look carefully you can pick it by the dog's demeanour. Imagine what a very soft dog that has been heavily corrected would be like if they had not been trained in that manner! We can only speculate but they might have been a lot brighter in the ring.

And how about those harder dogs who continually need bribing to get them to work? Hmmm. I've seen a few of those too.

Each to his own opinion though. That's what's great about this forum!