Reaching for the Sledge Hammer to do a Caliper's Job

    • Gold Top Dog

    Oh boy.  Sometimes you get to choose which hammer you want.  The big one, the small one.  Maybe the pink with sparkles, the old beat up hand me down, or something new and sleek.

    I really don't see any problem with leash tugs to get a dog's attention, especially when a dog is captivated by what's over yonder.

    I don't have a problem with leash corrections (P+, the big ones) used thoughtfully and in consideration of the dog's personality.  Sasha would be wrecked by a real leash correction. Ivan came to Jesus, in a very positive way, and his life was much more enjoyable once he found religion.

    Let's take kids for a moment.  I'm a very positive parent.  We don't punish, hardly ever. No spankings, no time outs, no 1-2-3 magic. People roll their eyes at me. The worst we do is impose a consequence, that is usually mild and short lasting.  Our goal is to not impose consequences at all.

    But sometimes, I yell.  Like YELL yell.  That is what it takes to get my daughter's attention sometimes.  She is a confident, rambunctious little monkey, and she'll be very upset for 2 minutes, then apologize and everything is happy. Now, 95% of kids would fall to pieces confronted with my kind of yelling. My kid doesn't.  For her it seems to be the equivalent of "the look."

    I am willing to believe there are dogs like that.  

    There are also plenty of parents who yell and smack in unhelpful ways, just as there are "yank and spank" dog handlers.

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    Dog_ma I love your signature, and I do have a pink hammer :)

    Carla, you did good, you have proven that some minds are closed, some are open. Some are using that hammer to try and point out their way is best while others are poor.

    I would also like you all to know that I have taken advice from a great many of you and used them with Kord, the headstrong bull headed teenage boy. Some have worked great, some not so great. I am not to old that I can not learn new tricks, and I am not afraid to say it or to try it.

    But in the end ladies and gentlemen what I choose to do has nothing to do with you or how you feel, it only matters to me and my dog.

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    I think it's worth it to note that some who now avoid strong corrections are not doing so because they don't want to consider that it might be effective. Nearly every single person that has changed to predominately +R,-P started out with corrections training.

    I have used corrections in the past. Body blocking which is fine, unless you have a Sibe. When they are interested in something else, you are just something to get around unless you've got something more interesting. All the body blocking in the world is nothing but a short game of weave pole.

    The scruff, grabbing by the loose skin on the back of the neck and applying pressure to bring the dog into a down and slight pressure to one side to induce a roll. Physically, it is a constraint against further action. And, some hope, is a cessation of the undesired activity. That is, the dog is not supposed to like this and will avoid future infractions to avoid this. Unless you have a Sibe, who plays rough and thinks this is part of the game.

    A good reason that I don't use especially the extreme corrections anymore is that they are ineffective.  At best, they only stop the behavior at the moment. In some cases, they cannot be administered fast enough. And, in most cases, most punishments, in the behavioral psych def, are not effective because they are not harsh enough. Even so, they don't always accomplish a permanent behavior change. I, too, have yet to find a thing I can't fix with positive motivation. Now, at the fence, I don't have to block Shadow. I stand next to him and he sits.

    I read his cues and if he is getting into something I don't want, I call a behavior that is incompatible with that. And I can do that much faster than I can get over to him and correct him.

    I also never got into collar corrections as a matter of physical dynamics. Out of the house or backyard, he is in harness. Inside the house or backyard, he is off-leash. Plus, I didn't want to damage his throat as he can pull several times his own weight. So learning walking manners without leash corrections is the key.

    He weighs 65 lbs and runs well over 30 mph. f=ma, force equals mass times acceleration. He is not as big or heavy as a GD but he can knock you down.

    Could I physically overpower him? To some extent, yes. I'm tall, strong, and fast. Could I use a physical punishment if I absolutely had to? Yes. But I don't carry all tools at one time. Just the ones I need, usually in my back right pocket, both literal and figurative.

    I used to think I was training him right. Then I found, for us, a better way.

    I can also be a bit didactic, though I try to subdue that. If something is logical and scientifically sound and is proven over and over again by people with even more experience and insight than me and if I can see it with my own eyes, then it is science for me and is indisputable until a better explanation or theory comes along. That may make me seem "uppity" or condescending and I don't mean it to be. I work within the limits of applied science.

    A question I had applies to the use of all four quads of OC. How many actually use -R? I've used +P. Now, +R and -P.

    Others here that use a physical style are actually more + then would appear on the surface. Which makes me wonder why the big diff? When someone doesn't like Donaldson, a whole slew of other sources are offered, no offense taken. Others have pointed out that Dunbar works a lot with puppies, as if that makes him not a good source on other dogs. Fine, try Clothier. Etc, etc.

    Obviously, we all care about our dogs. But offense gets taken when a person invests time, energy, and emotion in a particular system and that system gets criticised. So, we still have personalities to consider.

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    Truley
    Carla, you did good, you have proven that some minds are closed, some are open. Some are using that hammer to try and point out their way is best while others are poor.

    Are you really sure of that though?

    I can't speak for Spiritdogs, however I can see what she is getting at. Now, perhaps her mind IS closed (although I don't think it is), and if it is I'm sure she'll tell me. ;-) However, I think that it is not, and what I get from this is that just because she either a) doesn't use it herself, or b) tries to recommend alternatives, this doesn't mean she's closeminded. I'm sure she realizes that leash pops (they are called "tugs" now? These words change terms faster than I can keep up with them) are effective, to some degree. And I'm sure she also realizes that not all dogs have severe fallout from them. But does that negate her from trying to offer additional advice?

    Perhaps it came across as confrontational, but I found great purpose in her post. If we can get over perhaps the way in which it was worded, the point appeared to me to be that we as dog lovers are always striving to find new ways to better communicate with our dogs. Yes, leash pops work. If they didn't, nobody would be using them. Isn't the the point of being here? To learn, to grow, by sharing with others? Or just to argue? I sometimes wonder, really. At any given time we can only do what we know. But sometimes, eventually we find something a little bit more effective, or a little gentler, or a little more suited to the dog rather than the person, and we go with that. That's how we grow. I've seen Ron (sorry to use you as an example) grow a heck of a lot since I've been a member, and he's been around a lot longer than I have! He is an avid learner, soaking up everything he can, finding what works for him, and discarding other things that don't, or at least setting them aside until he has a need for them. What I "think" Spiritdogs is getting at, is what if you pushed yourself just a little bit? Open up your mind and try, instead of correcting what you don't want, start out with the premise that you only reward what you DO want? And see what the effect turns out to be? Start with no leash. That way you can't correct with a leash, you are forced to try other ways to get your dog to stay faithfully beside you. See what comes of it, how you feel while doing it. I really feel that you can't truly 'understand' some of these things unless you actually try them. It makes it hard, though, because I can understand why people don't wish to try things that can harm a dog, but I don't understand why there is such resistance to try, even if just for a tiny bit, something that causes no harm to the dog whatsoever, and provides no "risk" of harm. Don't knock it till ya try it, as the old saying goes. Is it even a consideration that perhaps rewarding what you want just "might" be more effective in the long run? Or is there closemindedness going on after all? I'm not being sarcastic here, I'm genuinely curious. "What if" you just gave it a try? Because there is no risk, as it's not punishment, what is there to lose?

    In terms of the "how to" of teaching walking on a leash - there is a fundamental difference, though, in the way a dog learns, between being punished (no, punished doesn't mean cruel or smack n' flack or whatever you call it...it's simply punishment - inhibiting behaviours) for certain behaviours, and learning what you want from the beginning. Unless you've tried it you'll never see the difference, but those of us who have done it know how vast that difference is. And if you don't want to do it that way, that's your choice, but you will never understand the difference if you don't see it for yourself. When a dog is punished for behaviour a certain way, it often ends up offering less behaviours in general. That is simply one of the known fallouts of punishment. They usually become more apt to wait to be told what to do, rather than offer behaviours to see if it's what you want. And again, there's nothing really wrong with a dog that waits to be told what to do, dogs that are true "thinkers" can be a pain to live with if that's not what you want. But the point is there is a difference, and I think that's where people are not understanding where some others are coming from. By the time you punish out the things you don't want, inevitably you are just left with the behaviour you desired, so there is very little left to reinforce! Whereas a dog that has been reinforced continuously for what you do want, is engaged in the learning, and isn't worried about trying something new. That is the difference. Again, having a dog that thinks for itself is not a dog for everybody, and some people prefer dogs that don't try new behaviours a whole lot - there is a place for that for some people - but in the end there is no debating that differences can be seen.

    Now I'm not even sure where I'm going with this....I came in here for a purpose and in all that got sidetracked...lol.

    Oh, I think I remember.....just because somebody challenges you, does not mean that they feel their method is "better" or that yours is "poor". And I don't think that anybody is proving that "any" minds are opened or closed. Now, for some people it might. Personally, yes, I do feel that rewarding what you want is more effective than punishing what you don't want. And I feel that way based upon my experiences over time. I have learned that I don't need to apply punishments to get to an end goal. I also realize, though, that other people don't know that, as they either haven't experienced it, or haven't been interested in experiencing it. Just because people challenge something that is said, doesn't at all mean they are "closeminded". All it means is that perhaps they have additional information that might help people out. If there were no disputes, this would be a heck of a boring place.

    If there was no discussion, if everybody agreed with everybody else, I know I'd have been gone a long time ago. Because I'm not here to have everybody agree with me. I am here to discuss what I think, why I think that, defend my position and back it up, and perhaps yes, even to alter my position if I learn something that appears to fit into my lifestyle. If I wanted everybody to simply agree with me I'd join the clicker lists - and I have. But you know, I've had a much more appreciable time being able to discuss WHY what I do works, rather than talk to other people who already know it works, if you know what I mean. Some people might not, but I LIKE having my ideas challenged, because it makes me remain true to myself, it prevents living in that "cloudy bubble world" where all is happy and glory and whatnot, what you get when everybody already agrees with what you say.

    I guess the point is, people have to toughen up a little bit, and get over the fact that not everybody agrees with them. If you come here, you SHOULD expect somebody to question what you do, or to offer something a bit different to see what you think. And you should be very happy to back up what you do, explain why what you're doing is most effective, and perhaps, just maybe, find something that is a little more effective than what you are currently doing. I know I've changed some things that I've done since I started here, not drastic things but things that have made life easier for me, and for my dogs. So we are all susceptible to learning something, if we just open our minds. And that means everybody. Don't immediately put up that wall when somebody challenges it. Instead, don your hat, smile, and be ready for a discussion.

    I too think this thread is too far gone, but I certainly enjoyed it while it lasted, and have gleaned some nice information from it!

    • Gold Top Dog

    mudpuppy
    Example: if you try to train a dog to heel with leash corrections, you will administer literally hundreds of "nags" before the dog gets it, AND you'll have great difficulty in transfering the behavior to off-leash fluency.

     

    And then you are actually doing what the topic of this thread is, i dont think anyone here thinks you need to do it that way

    spiritdogs
    My guess is that you are focused on telling her what NOT to do.  You may not be a yank & cranker, or whatever terminology you would like to use, but certainly your actions, if you are tugging, impede the dog from offering ANY behavior at that moment

     

    This is one of the times when i can tell you are totally wrong, when you are correcting the dog she is automatically offering you a different behavior, that behavior is not to be focused on the other dog, and the best of all is that i didnt need to teach her what to do instead!!! she did exactly the behavior i wanted her to do, she offered it, i accepted (but i'm sure i already told you this before)

    ron2
    A good reason that I don't use especially the extreme corrections anymore is that they are ineffective.  At best, they only stop the behavior at the moment. In some cases, they cannot be administered fast enough. And, in most cases, most punishments, in the behavioral psych def, are not effective because they are not harsh enough. Even so, they don't always accomplish a permanent behavior change.

     

    A clear example that indicates that technique was not for you, i actually have found that when i use it i get totally the opposite results of what you are talking about

     

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    I admit to maybe choosing the wrong words, but the point is there, some people are unwilling to change or be accepting of others.

    I am not one of those people.

    Since joining this forum I have learned a great many things. I was, mind you was, a +R +P pet owner, I had my girl almost 12 years. Now I have the boy, and oh boy have I learned alot. Do you know that before joining this board I never ever heard of NILIF? Yep, I was locked in a closet. I had to actually go and look it up, I was embarrassed to ask what it meant. Since then I have tried it, it works! it works! And it is here to stay. I have this board to thank for that, not some TV dog trainer.

    Not everyone is like me, I am willing to try new things, I am not so old and set in my ways that I cannot learn or try new things. I am willing to listen to others point of view, even welcome it. A good debate is good for the soul, it keeps you on your feet and mentally stimulate. But at the same time there are times when you just have to say enough and move on.

    • Gold Top Dog

    Ixas_girl
    But ... I quickly discovered what I saw as fundamental holes, for me, in the R+ lexicon that were limiting my growth.

    That's a great starting point. You say fundamental holes. What were these holes, and in what situations did you come upon them? Perhaps, rather than limiting your growth, and giving up, one could investigate them a little deeper and see if there's still light at the end of the tunnel. Perhaps you misunderstood something. Perhaps you might try something a little different, such as starting a little farther back than you first tried. What precisely was limiting your growth?

    Ixas_girl

    Let's just agree you and I have very different ideas about what kinds of language, intentions, and energies constitute "discussion."

    I would say I agree with you if I had any idea what you are talking about, but I don't, so I can't agree, sorry. ;-) I can't really see how your idea of discussion is that different than mine. Unless of course you want everybody to agree with you......(which I am not saying that is the case).....I don't understand how your definition of discussion might be different than mine.

    Ixas_girl
    Really? Why?

    I think you misunderstood me. By toughen up, I mean get used to the fact that something you say might be questioned. If you say "My dog pulls on leash, so I pop the collar when the dog pulls ahead", and I reply "Have you tried instead rewarding the dog for being in the proper position, or tried working without a leash". That is not in any way offensive or rude, so if one takes offense to being provided another alternative, that is not my problem, to be honest. Unless once again you wish people to agree with you and not offer advice. But then once again we wouldnt' be learning, we'd all simply be agreeing with each other all of the time and that would get far too boring for me. I'm not here to hear how much people agree with me, I'm here to learn and share. We are not here to hurt each other, of course not, and I do my very best not to ever put somebody in a position to feel hurt, but we are not here to pussyfoot around either and refrain from talking about certain subjects, or alternatives, for fear somebody might be offended at what we say simply because we disagree. Disagreement is not synonymous with offending. It never has been, and never will be. But far too many people can't STAND that somebody simply disagrees with them, and they do get quite perturbed by it.

    By "toughen up a little bit", I simply mean that in order to really be able to converse on a forum, we have to be able to handle disagreement, realize that not everybody will agree with us, and in some cases expect that, and we have to be able to handle somebody providing background evidence for that disagreement, without getting our panties in a bunch so that at the end of the day, even if we never agree, feelings are not hurt. I can't help if my saying "I think ____ are wrong" hurts somebody else's feelings just because they use it. If they are taking my personal values and attaching them to themselves, that is their issue, not mine. I'm not going to pretend they ARE okay "to me" just to keep the peace. Just like I'm not going to get hurt feelings when somebody tells me that they think clickers are stupid. At the end of the day I know what works for my guys, and for all of us, that is what matters.

    • Gold Top Dog

    spiritdogs

    What I don't get is how you have managed to hang out here for so long and never learned how to have a dog pay attention to you without having to even touch the leash...  I simply don't understand the concept that you would need to use the leash to get your dog's attention or have her look at you.   .... ...  Why on earth would you not simply teach her some commands that she can do instead of what you do not want her to do?  If she is sitting, she isn't jumping up.  If she is looking at your face, she isn't barking at an approaching dog.  So simple it's mind boggling how many people still just want to correct the dog THEN tell it what to do.  Why not just cut to the chase?

     

    Again, thanks for the great example! Instead of simply offering how you do it, instead of asking why I do what I do, instead of just sitting back and listening to me sing my song, this post expresses incredulity that I haven't YET learned the poster's preferred method for dog handling!!!!!!!!

    The truth is ... I don't LIKE the poster's preferred method of dog handling! I like mine! I choose mine!

    I talk to my dog through the leash, I talk to my dog through words, I talk to my dog through touch and movement and a world of sensory means! If my dog's attention wanders to a kitty, why would I want to interrupt our walk to have her turn around, sit and watch me, when I can simply give the leash jiggle to gather her attention and we can keep moving forward, not skipping a beat?! Stopping for the turn/sit/watch me would be cumbersome for me.

    Kim_MacMillan
    I'm sure she realizes that leash pops (they are called "tugs" now? ...


    I usually hold my dog's leash with one finger ... a wiggle of my finger is all it takes to  "talk with her" ... I love how elegant that is! Because I insist on keeping my skin thin (and my sensitivity high) I can tell the difference between a leash jiggle, a leash tug, a leash pop and a leash yank, and I'm always learning better how to use these best ... And that's only a small glimpse into the world of touch and vocabulary in leash handling! Smile

    • Gold Top Dog

    Kim_MacMillan

    Ixas_girl
    But ... I quickly discovered what I saw as fundamental holes, for me, in the R+ lexicon that were limiting my growth.

    That's a great starting point. You say fundamental holes. What were these holes, and in what situations did you come upon them? Perhaps, rather than limiting your growth, and giving up, one could investigate them a little deeper and see if there's still light at the end of the tunnel. Perhaps you misunderstood something. Perhaps you might try something a little different, such as starting a little farther back than you first tried. What precisely was limiting your growth?

     

     holes

    Noooo! I'm afraid of the holes! Tongue Tied Heehee! Big Smile

    Kidding aside ... Ok, I'll match you minute for minute ... I'll examine R+ holes ... looking for light, for every minute you spend examining Millanesque holes ... also looking for light!

    How's about this ... I'll read Pryor's "don't shoot the dog" looking with acceptance and optimism to be completely fulfilled by what she has to offer, and you read one of Millan's books, also with acceptance and optimism to be completely fulfilled by what he has to offer. We'll meet back here to exchange all the wonderful, unexpected stuff we found in the holes. It's a deal?

    • Gold Top Dog

    lilybelle
    A gentle snap of the leash to bring her focus back onto me is imo better then letting her focus on something that could get her or someone/thing else hurt such as another dog that she thinks she needs to beat up. It gets her attention when nothing else will and lets me use the behavior modification steps that her behaviorist taught me to use with her

     

      Yes I agree, and it works, and there is nothing at all wrong with it.

     

     Also for some of those who continue to espouse a better way, suggesting that leash corrections nag the dog and are not effective, I must say I find it interesting that I have trained my dogs since the early 70s beginning with the Khoeler method and picking up and dropping many things along the way. I use leash corrections, Hektor walks on a loose lead and off leash at heel and has done so pretty much from the beginning, no yanking and cranking was needed only minor corrections here and there. Gunnar can perform like a military drill at the heel both on and off leash and could hold his own against border collies and GSD's. He was taught using leash corrections and with him it was also easy and did not take any yanking and cranking or hanging.

     If this method is so archaic, so old style, so wrong how come so many obedience champions train and swear by this method? Even the Khoeler method, which many call yank and crank, puts out a very reliable dog. Positive only clicker trainers are starting to win but I still have not seen the proof that dogs who never receive leash corrections and train only using treats and praise are as reliable as others. It would be interesting to take two pups from hard working lines, give one to a positive treat only clicker trainer, and one to someone who is mostly positive but does use corrections and see which one titles the fastest. I would have my money on the on who also uses corrections.

     Hektor is only eight months old and he went into both his classes already knowing everything they were teaching. He is reliable off leash and on at eight months. Distractions he has come against so far are rabbits (called off of chase, returned and heeled for 50 yards or so before being released, called off of coyote chase returned to sit position, finished to heel position and walked at heel off leash for 50 yards or so before being released again. Called to sit position and finish to heel position while neighbor walked dogs past our house (he was loose in front yard with me at the time). Mind you Hektor's heel is not tight, I have not tried to make it so. He will never be a wrap around your left leg dog when doing the heel but he is at my left side and stays with me, and sits when I stop and turns when I turn.

     Do you know how much time I spend per week working my dogs on obedience exercises (heel, drop, stay and finish)? Maybe 30 minutes. Most of the time we are out running the mesa, or sitting in the backyard playing Frisbee or ball or laying around the house watching TV. Since Hektor is young I spend 10-15 minutes about 3 times a week working with him. (Mind you we use life to train, so there are countless sits, downs, go to your beds, waits, leave its etc ) Many classes he went to without having practiced at all the previous week and still executed the drills and did it better than those who had practiced. With Gunnar we practice once a week and sometimes only twice a month for about 15 minutes.

     I am tired of hearing that the clicker based, treat based only method is better, faster, and more reliable than using corrections. I have not seen that proven anywhere yet. It may work, it may make you feel better not using corrections, it may give you warm fuzzies, but it isn’t better and it is not more reliable.

    • Gold Top Dog

     Geez Louise. This is getting silly, people.

    Carla, if someone had told me I could improve my relationship with my near-perfect dog before I figured that out for myself, you bet your life I would have tried it out. If someone had told me I could talk to an animal with my body if I let them learn and told me how to do that, I would have done it. Why wouldn't someone want a fantastic relationship with their dog as opposed to a good relationship with their dog? Who chooses cooking chocolate over premium?? Wink  If people don't want fantastic relationships, then I'll take my talk of hares and wild animals elsewhere. I just assumed everyone on this board would want the best relationship they could have with their dogs. I guess that's why I come off preachy. I just assume no one is hearing me because I'm met with so little interest. I'd fall over myself to learn how people find a magical relationship with their dogs. And if someone has a method that's different to mine, then please, tell me! (Thanks Cressida Smile)

    Ixas, I'm sorry you think those of us who like operant conditioning are somehow soulless or lacking in spirit. I am thick-skinned; I don't care if people think I'm a nutcase or my methods are wrong. Nonetheless, my relationships with my animals are so much more than just getting them to do something I want them to. Yes, leadership and 'energy' and intentions and non-verbal communication all comes into it. It's just that I find that bit comes on its own if I just concentrate on what result I want and stick to my operant conditioning. The airy fairy, spiritual stuff can look after itself as long as I give my animals the utmost respect. I bonded with Kit without even touching him. I had to be very subtle. More subtle than I've ever seen anyone be with a dog that isn't on the edge of fight or flight mode. Kit is frequently on the edge.

    Truley, I don't really know who you're talking about. If some of us are close-minded because we tried something that worked a whole lot better than what we were doing before and haven't yet found a need to deviate from that new method, then I guess you can just call us close-minded and hopefully we'll be thick-skinned enough to deal with it.

    I'm tired of these stupid arguments. I still haven't seen anyone accuse anyone else of being cruel.  

    • Gold Top Dog

    Moderator note..

    This thread will remain civil and on topic.  The sniping and subtle digs at each other stop NOW. 

    • Gold Top Dog

    corvus
    Carla, if someone had told me I could improve my relationship with my near-perfect dog before I figured that out for myself, you bet your life I would have tried it out.

     

    Me, too. I have. And I do. I use mostly +R.

    In the past, I used +R only for about 1.5 years. It did not give me a better relationship with my dogs.  

    corvus
    If someone had told me I could talk to an animal with my body if I let them learn and told me how to do that, I would have done it.

     

    I do that. I do that ALL the time. Smile  I talk to them with my body and my energy.

    corvus
    Why wouldn't someone want a fantastic relationship with their dog as opposed to a good relationship with their dog?

     

    I can't imagine why someone wouldn't want that. I want that, and I have that.  

    corvus
    I just assume no one is hearing me because I'm met with so little interest.

     

    Please don't EVER assume that! I believe you're met with so little RESISTANCE because you make so much sense! I've recently learned that most of these "discussions" are about drama. And a necessary ingredient in a high-drama event is a drastic difference of opinion. So even though you participate actively, you don't create drama. That's why it seems like no one is listening to you. But I'm listening, I'm hearing you, I'm fascinated and interested. Please don't think your contribution is not valuable. I consider it one of the best.

    corvus
    I'd fall over myself to learn how people find a magical relationship with their dogs. And if someone has a method that's different to mine, then please, tell me!

     

    I think many of us have magical relationships with our dogs. We just go about getting them in different ways. And I think that's ok. I don't think there's only one road to the kingdom. Wink If I could put my opinion in a nutshell, that's what it would be. I believe the people Truley is saying are "closed-minded" are those who believe that there's only one road to the kingdom, no matter which road they happen to be on. Neither road is the only road or the best road or the most magical road... It's just that they're different.

    One road passes by a high desert landscape with majestic saguaro cactus and magical desert blossoms in vivid, brilliant colors, while coyotes, foxes, bobcats and jackrabbits bask in the healing heat and refresh in the cool clear star-filled evenings... The other road is curvy and mountainous and lined with huge fir trees and where deer and elk breathe the scent of crisp, cool, cleansing air as they travel around the beautiful lakes in the whispering breeze...

    Which is better?  

    corvus
    I'm tired of these stupid arguments.

     

    Yeah, me too. But I wanted to respond to you because your thoughts are important to me.  Smile

    • Gold Top Dog

    dgriego
     I am tired of hearing that the clicker based, treat based only method is better, faster, and more reliable than using corrections. I have not seen that proven anywhere yet. It may work, it may make you feel better not using corrections, it may give you warm fuzzies, but it isn’t better and it is not more reliable.

    I think it depends what you deem to be "better" and that is subjective.  What you think is "better" will depedn on what you want and what your goals are.  You might think method X is better because the end result is (in your experience) dogs are more reliable.  Maybe someone else thinks X is better because it's nicer for the dog and handler, getting a perfect "finish" is not their priority, but having a dog who is creative and loves to learn and contines to grow intellectually IS.  And there are several other ways it could go, but those are the first two that spring to mind.

    It's interesting, there was a study done on the "forced" recall (long line, reeling the dog in) and one trained with R+.  The R+ one was more reliable.  It would have been interesting to have had a third group of dogs trained R+ with a little bit of correction to see the effect.  I don't THINK that has been done.  I would be thrilled if it has been and we could all check it out.

    It is interesting you say you want to see a dog trained positive only and one with some corrections to see which titles faster.  It shows a fundamental lack of understanding on two levels.  One:  there IS no such thing as a positive only trainer.  The closest you will get is the trainer who MINIMISES the use of P+, but that then hardly draws a hard fast line between the groups for a, shall we say, "fair experiment".  Two: if a dog is taught, for example, a "sit" using a marker (like a clicker) and a method like freeshaping, which is all about rewarding what you want and ignoring what you dont want, the dog who is taught with lure, or molding or even corrections will probably learn it faster!  BUT - the dog who learns with the freeshaping is more RELIABLE.  Hence why many suspect people like CM for the quick fix, because other methods take more time.  But if its reliablity you want - then yes, its BETTER.  There have been studies to prove this.  I have seen it in my own experience also. 

    dgriego
    I have not seen that proven anywhere yet. It may work, it may make you feel better not using corrections, it may give you warm fuzzies, but it isn’t better and it is not more reliable.

    Why wait to see it proven?  TRY IT.  I am only assuming you haven't tried it because I don't recall you mentioning using such a technique, or what problems you had with it, and trust me, I do read your posts with interest. 

    I am thinking back to the OP and I am thinking... who was being accused of being close minded?  Was it me?  Was it a "camp"?  Was it the mythical Positive Only Camp?  (Or rather, minimal P+ camp????  Smile)  Only I am seeing far more closemindedness from those who don't train that way, who don't have an issue with "corrections".  Most people who DO train "R+ only" (wince) have tried both.  Most people who don't have not.  And I'm not just talking about HERE I'm talking about all over.... mostly about dog owners that I "know properly", not just online.  And also trainers, particularly trainers who have been in the business for a long time and have progressed WITH it... as times and styles have changed, so have they.  So please don't take that as being directed at anyone here.  It's just a general rule I have noticed.

    • Gold Top Dog

    FourIsCompany
    In the past, I used +R only for about 1.5 years. It did not give me a better relationship with my dogs.  

    I'd be interested if you would share more about this period.  In the past, despite my best efforts, I have never even succeeded in using R+ only to compare that with other methods.  It is, I think, an elusive shining unicorn that many seem to chase after and never catch.... but I suspect up close, that horn could do a lot of damage so perhaps thats just as well Wink

    I don't get all of this talk about this road is better or that road is.  Of course I think my way is better.  If I thought your way was, I would use that.  If you thought my way was, you would use it instead of what you use currently.  That goes without saying surely?  And of course, I'm not going to espouse what YOU do, because I think what I do is better.  And of course I am going to share with you how great THIS way is, because thats why I am here!  To share.  If you convince me to try something, great!  And then I'll go and share it with others.  And yeah, if I think another way is not so good because of X or could be harmful because of Y, then I'll share that  too.  What is the harm in that?  Where is the cause for offense?