Here's a fun one...

Workingdoglover

Liesje

The out is something that he will learn reliably when he is at that point in the training and the work.  On his tug he actually auto-outs (if I lock up, he outs on his own....I only say it and you only hear me saying it in the indoor video just to throw in some classical conditioning).  I predict that he will auto-out on the sleeve fairly easily as well because he works much more in defense and fight than in prey drive (it's often the prey dogs that get really dirty and chewy on the sleeve, want to rip it off and kill it).

It's not the fast that is important but knowing whether or not the dog can work through pressure.  I think I've already explained this a gazillion times so we can agree to disagree.  Clicker training a dog all of his SchH skills is really setting that dog up for failure later on, not to mention that it doesn't tell you anything about your DOG, only that you are a good clicker trainer and the dog likes clicker training (haven't yet met one that doesn't).

 

My dog was trained to out on the tug just like yours (locking up the tug so the fun is over, and as soon as he outs, the games starts again).  We did the same thing with the sleeve.  The helper would drive the dog, then stop and hold the sleeve still.  Rafe auto-outed the first time we tried it, and as far as I can remember he's never not outed when asked.  From the dogs I've seen, this is the best way to train (as far as most reliable).  I'm sure there are dogs that this wouldn't work for, however, as there are some dogs that are much more serious about things and don't consider it a "game" like the tug game.  

I do have to disagree with the clicker training statement - "Clicker training a dog all of his SchH skills is really setting that dog up for failure later on..." - There is a club we've been training with in the St. Louis area that only uses clicker training.  No pinch collars, e-collars, etc. are allowed on the field.  Two of their dogs went to nationals and one got his SchHII there (the other was pulled due to injury).  I've seen them work several times and they are good.  

In regards to compulsion telling you how good your dog is - I'm not so sure.  Lorna of Incredible Dobermans posted this on the dobetalk forum...

"Patrick & I are members of the International Working dog Breeders Association. The conference was held in Belgium this year, so we were unable to attend, but our friend Paul Mundell just returned and filled us in.
One of the presentations was a study just completed called, "Comparison of stress and learning effects of three different training methods in dogs" by Esther Schalke of Germany.
The study compared methods of correction and training and measured cortisol levels to determine stress produced by each method/corrective device. Interestingly, the electric collar correction produced the least amount of stress, followed closely by the prong collar. The dogs that showed the most stress and produced the highest levels of cortisol were those trained solely with positive methods and when food was withheld as a correction, their stress levels were off the charts!
Between this study and the recent one on using dominance, the dog training world seems to be justifying the "old" methods as the ones dogs understand and deal with best. Don't know if I am correctly expressing my thought here.
One theory that I find interesting is that because dogs live in a rather violent society themselves, ( i.e, they bite to correct, or use very physical body language) they seem to deal with correction that resembles their own best - something I have tended to believe myself for years. I know it has always worked for all of my dogs over the years provided I have correctly read their sensitivity levels.
Anyway, thought I would share. When the study is actually published and/or when I get the notes from the presentation, I'll post here for those interested."

My thoughts (and this is just my opinion of the whole thing - who really knows what's going on in a dog's head?) are that training with clickers/markers is more stressful for the dog because they have to really think for themselves and figure things out instead of being more or less "shown" what to do with the traditional compulsion methods. 

Again, just my opinion.  I'm not saying you're wrong or that your training methods are wrong, just giving a different perspective.  ;)

Actually, I agree with you that clicker training is stressful, just as it's stressful sometimes for us to learn something by figuring it out instead of having it explained.  But, to make the jump to intimating that all stress is bad and dogs need to be trained by traditional methods because they understand it best - not so convincing. 

Liesje, just to clarify, my dog did not learn the out by the method I shared with you.  That method was suggested to me by a positive trainer who used to teach Schutzhund.  My dog was trained using object exchanges and food exchanges.  However, she has a reliable "out" too, although that isn't her cue word.

spiritdogs

Actually, I agree with you that clicker training is stressful, just as it's stressful sometimes for us to learn something by figuring it out instead of having it explained.  But, to make the jump to intimating that all stress is bad and dogs need to be trained by traditional methods because they understand it best - not so convincing. 

I wasn't really agreeing with that part.  Actually I think stress is a very important part of life (I mean we all seem to need a little stress in our lives to actually be happy - doesn't make a lot of sense right off, but when you think about it, we're happier as problem solvers).  All to an extent, of course.  

I think that, all in all, different methods work better for different dogs.  You just need to find what works for both of you.  I just don't agree that a completely clicker trained schutzhund dog will be a failure at some point.     

Liesje

Also the dogs need to learn how to problem solve under pressure.  It is the whole point of Schutzhund being the overall test of the breed's drives, nerves, temperament, soundness, intelligence, athletic ability.  The goal is not to teach the dog to do the skill, it's much different than that.  Most of the skills a dog learns in SchH have little to no practical value, but it is exposing the strengths and weaknesses of the dog that are the purpose.  The ends do not justify the means.

The more i work with my supposedly soft dogs under what seems like pretty real pressure to me, i.e. tracking in condtions that aren't hugely favourable at all, I get to wondering whether a lot of "the breed's drives, nerves, temperament, soundness, intelligence, athletic ability" is a human construct to describe and objectify a set of qualities that may not hold at the dog end of the lead.

I have never ever used any element of compulsion in training my poodles for tracking, but my oldest girl has kept going in unbelivably trying conditions Conditions that i find hot sweaty and difficult and she is a black poodle.....Using the common  explanation above she should fall over before the start... I keep wondering what is happening? Is she exceptional? Yet much the same happens with my boy. I do all the R+ stuff, and it all works. Over here the grounds can get pretty prickly now . I can't walk on them with bare feet, yet both of my dogs will work on prickly grounds and as soon as they stop they want to tippy toe... Both will drop ointo the prickles. If they didn't i would think fair enough.

I also don't doubt that R- is an efficient training technique but i guess that i wonder about  neccessity. I have seen some very good Shutzhund dogs trained with stuff all compulsion and a whole lot of clicker.

 I have serious doubts about the way that the cliker vs e collar vs prong paper has been reported in this series of postings, I actually had doubts when i read the paper some time ago about it's methods and it appeared to the best of my recollection to be a bit anti e collar if anything. Because of I was  also wondering about the protocol for measuring cortisol levels and how the timing may affect the results i didn't use it any anti e collar discussions that i was having at the time. May be the Author could be contacted and the paper in full could be posted???

Workingdoglover

I think that, all in all, different methods work better for different dogs.  You just need to find what works for both of you.  I just don't agree that a completely clicker trained schutzhund dog will be a failure at some point.     

I agree.  I don't think the dog will be a failure, it's just a matter of what you are looking for from the dog.  For me, if a dog is going to be valuable for the breed in a breeding program then it needs to prove itself beyond simply getting the titles or even placing high on the podium at nationals.  There's already a split even among SchH people between the ones that value the process and the ones that value the titles, the points, the flashy style.  We all know that the winning dog isn't necessarily the best dog, or the best producer.  Even though it's the same activity it can be different things to different people.  All of the training I do with my other dogs, and most of the training I do with Nikon is "setting the dog up for success" (which I believe clicker or marker training is the best for) but there comes to a point where I need to not only believe that my dog is not just smart and happy and trainable, but courageous and has correct fight drive and aggression, and I need to know where his weaknesses are in those areas.  I don't think this is exposed simply through how the dog titles and places at a trial but how the dog is trained and worked by a good training helper.

poodleOwned

The more i work with my supposedly soft dogs under what seems like pretty real pressure to me, i.e. tracking in condtions that aren't hugely favourable at all, I get to wondering whether a lot of "the breed's drives, nerves, temperament, soundness, intelligence, athletic ability" is a human construct to describe and objectify a set of qualities that may not hold at the dog end of the lead.

First, your dogs don't sound all that soft to me!

Second, I think a lot of it is a human construct but so are lots of aspects of dog ownership.  Spaying/neutering dogs, keeping them indoors, feeding them kibbles, walking them on a leash...after all the are domestic animals and we have created breeds to serve our purposes in one way or another.  Detecting narcotics, apprehending suspects, border patrol, homeland security, SAR, HRD, bomb detection, personal protection, herding, Service Dog, therapy dog...all human constructs but all important jobs that many breeds do, so yes, I think it's important to have checks and balances on the dogs, good ways of evaluating how they work.

 Nikon is a little scary! LOL That is intense! I loooooove your moving sit. I have no use for one (because both girls have a really nice moving down, and we do AKC events only), but I always wondered how one was taught. It looks GREAT!!

How about rally?  Is there a sit, walk around dog?  Or only a down or stand....  I can't wait to show off his stand out of motion in RE!  We're starting rally in January but I'm waiting a while yet for him to mature in the head before we do any trials.

 Bean's moving stand is to die for. She freezes, like Nikon. No moving sit. There is a halt, walk around, in Nov (can be used all the way through), a halt, down, walk around, a moving down walk around, and moving stand, walk around. No moving sit. They should do that, though. Of course, 50 signs is probably enough to learn, LOL.

 One of the presentations was a study just completed called, "Comparison of stress and learning effects of three different training methods in dogs" by Esther Schalke of Germany.

I think it is best to get the presentation yiourself off the web and make up your own mind. It sure is streching it to suggest what this writer has.

 It would be nice, but the OP (not to this thread, but the thread I got the study info from) never did post a link to the whole study.

http://www.ecma.eu.com/Comparison%20of%20stress%20and%20learning%20effects%20of%20three%20different%20training

%20methods%20in%20dogs.pdf

Here you go. I hope that helps you. I have a real concern about scientific trials being over extended and misreported. The study is a very limited study and it deals with a behaviour that is acknowledged by many as being difficult to teach using positive methods. I used to be more generous, but as far as i am now concerned, if some one does over extend and misreport, then i really start to doubt their ability to report anything correctly.

It affects debate terribly. I have got so cynical  in the dog world that there are very few people that i trust on any side on any debate to report clearly and accurately. I don't know whether it is ignorance of the process of science, or some kind of need to be seen as "right". I really don't know.