# Free-shaping



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Please explain.


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

What do you want to freeshape?

It's generally a tool used with a dog that thinks and offers behaviors.

Basically, you kind of just wait until the dog does something close to the behavior you're looking for (without any cues from you) and then you mark that behavior (click/treat). Then you wait for closer and closer approximations of the behavior you ultimately want. 

THIS is a much more in-depth response (and I honestly did not read the whole thing).

Liesje on this forum uses a lot of freeshaping and has some videos of teaching her dog, Nikon, to do things via freeshaping. She's excellent at it.

I, on the other hand, do not have the patience and can't seem to stop myself from using verbal markers (both positive and negative) to guide Madix to the right behavior. I do a shaping, but not free-shaping - I think. LOL

Hope that helps at least a little.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

Don't have time to write anything now, but I will like this thread 

Z-burg you always come up with the most talked about topics....


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

I love the idea of free shaping, just wish I had the patience to try it more and have fun with it! Though we do tend to use it somewhat in agility, just with a bit more luring than is good because of time constraints at class and on the equipment...

Great cause it's all about having our dogs THINK and learn to participate in training, not have to wait and be 'corrected' to learn the right way or what we want.





 
This woman is amazing cause she has great timing (and no talking  ). When she started unintentionally getting a head swipe instead of continuing with the 'bow' she immediately broke it back down to help progress.


----------



## jakeandrenee (Apr 30, 2010)

I am trying this with Jake, he get so bored it seems....it's not as easy as I thought.


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

Ooooo that second video is great! I would like to teach Madix this


----------



## valreegrl (Nov 11, 2009)

Free-shaping can be a lot of fun! 

Definitely watch for clues that your dog is on the right track with the behavior you want to end with. I watched a friend free-shape and she inadvertently taught the dog to flick his ear  He kept offering and offering this behavior, it was too cute!


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Cool videos ...

Yea, I'm like Falon and MRL. I don't have the patience for that lol. With Ike's fun things, it is lure -> introduce verbal/physical cue -> gradually fade the lure and modify/minimalize physical cues until the dog is under verbal control. Classical conditioning stuff. But I can definitely appreciate good clicker/marker training. It's a treat to watch for sure!


----------



## JKlatsky (Apr 21, 2007)

Debbie Zappia does a lot of free shaping, if you ever get a chance to see one of her seminars. For me...I think it's difficult to start free shaping an older dog. I don't really have the patience for free shaping- I prefer a lure and a marker.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Interesting, I've been working on an article on freeshaping and Schutzhund training. To me the "free" in freeshaping refers to two different things. First it means that you are "free" of any tool or gimmick other than your mark and your reward. No leashes or collars, no props or tools needed (unless what you are shaping is the dog interacting with a "prop" like perch training, retrieves, jump technique...). No corrective devices (not because correction is bad, but it's not part of freeshaping). The second aspect of it being "free" means that it promotes a certain learning style within the dog. The dog learns to be more "free" himself. The dog is not dependent on the handler for lures and excess cues, nor stressed or anxious because it was patterned trained and something didn't happen in the right order. The dog is more free thinking and able to try things on his own in order to find the "right" (desired) behavior that earns the reward. Pure freeshaping is really standing their and waiting for the dog to offer the behavior (or the step toward the behavior) that you want, so freeshaping = problem solving.

Freeshaping usually works well with backchaining, but you can freeshape a simple behavior and not be backchaining, and you can backchain behaviors using lure/reward or classical conditioning or escape training. The most common place I see backchaining and freeshaping used together is what people call the "purely positive" retrieve.

I like to use freeshaping across venues (obedience, agility, Schutzhund, rally....) as much as possible because I like my dog to be clear-headed and problem solving without excess help from me or conflict created by me. Some dogs take better to this training style than others. It's almost like you have to initially train the dog to understand the training style, and then you have to use it on a fairly regular basis for the dog to keep up with it. As much as I love and prefer freeshaping, I also use a LOT of lure/mark/reward type training, I use all sorts of corrections in all three phases, and I also use pressure/escape training (the latter of which I believe is much like freeshaping, a form of training I find very valuable and need my dog to understand so I make a point of using it for certain behaviors).

I think freeshaping requires a lot of patience from the handler. I believe it helps a handler become a better trainer because it forces the handler to break down behaviors in ways the dog will understand, and it places absolute importance on the timing of the mark/reward (and on the flip side, I think prong collars are a great tool and I prefer them over e-collars because it forces the handler to learn correct line handling, what type of correction is appropriate, timing of the correction, and how to use directional corrections).

What I see from my dog that I've made a much better effort at freeshaping is a dog that more clearly understands behaviors. Just because a dog DOES a behavior or a chain doesn't mean he really understands what he's doing and exactly what he needs to do to earn the reward. Also, the behaviors I've freeshaped happen to be behaviors where my dog has always been correct and consistent, haven't had to go back and fix or polish this or that because with freeshaping, you simply don't move on to the next step unless the dog is correct in the step you're on (but again, this implies some skill on the part of the handler, knowing what IS correct and how to break down these steps for the dog). Two things I'm freeshaping right now are the send out for Schutzhund and the 2x2 weave method for agility. The last thing I've freeshaped was teaching my puppy to speak/bark (that would be an example of something that is simple, not a behavior chain that is backchained, I just stand there with the reward until the dog makes a noise, then mark/reward, then after several reps of this I up the ante and wait for the dog to make a louder noise...then up the ante more until the dog must actually bark for the reward).

I guess a very simple example of freeshaping would be the A-frame. Most people would simply leash their dog, guide it over, and praise or throw a toy on the other side. Nothing wrong with that, works just fine (and with most dogs I'd probably do just the same). But say I want to "freeshape" this behavior. I take the dog free of any "hardware" and go to the area of the A-frame. This is the dog's first interaction with the A-frame, so when the dog goes over to sniff it, I mark/reward. After the dog has figured out "I'm getting rewarded for messing with this A-frame", he decides to climb it. Now I only mark and reward for climbing it. Then we progress to mark/reward for climbing up and over the other side. Then he needs to go over and back to earn a reward. At this point I should say that I use freeshaping mostly for understanding the behavior and correctness. Once the dog does the whole thing - going out, over, and back - and clearly understands that is why he's getting rewarded, I'll do something that puts the dog in a higher state of drive which increases speed. I once saw in a video clip Ellis saying that dogs don't really understand getting rewarded for a fast behavior and not getting rewarded for a correct but slow behavior and I tend to agree with this. When I want a FAST behavior, I get the dog in a higher state of drive beforehand. So anyway, back to freeshaping the A-frame. I taught a dog this way while my friends led their dogs over the A-frame by the leash and gave a toy on the other side. The result was one dog who was instantly terrified of the A-frame and refused to do it, and another dog that liked the A-frame and was willing to interact with it but didn't really understand that the behavior = go over, come back, and get reward, so he was inconsistent (stopping at the top and running back for the toy, going around it, going over it but coming back around). The issue most people have with freeshaping is that it takes a lot of time and patience at the beginning. Once it "clicks" I find that the dog really takes off and doesn't need to be cleaned up after the fact, but it can take a while to "click". So, it might take me three sessions of freeshaping to get my dog doing the A-frame but after three sessions I can heel him over, tell him "hup" without any other cue, lure, or reward present, and have him go over and back to me whereas one friend's dog won't go near it and the other friend's dog will go on it but now has tried all these wrong things and needs to be fixed for those three sessions. Again this is just supposed to be a simple example, in the grand scheme of things going over the A-frame is not a major issue or accomplishment.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Interesting....I'm thinking.


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Very well put, Lies!

It's interesting that you compare freeshaping to escape training. I always thought there were a lot of shaping going on in the teaching of the forced retrieve.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Personally I like both and think both are important. However what I see from dogs that only get escape training and some lure type training is a dog that is more reactive than proactive (I'm not talking about "reactive" like as in a sharp nervy temperament, but as far as how the dog interacts during training, a proactive dog makes things happen and problems solves almost for the sake of it). To a lot of people, that distinction doesn't matter, and to a lot of people how and what exactly the dog learns and what's doing on in his head doesn't matter either as long as the dog performs the behavior correctly for points. Again, nothing wrong with that. I'm just more of a training/learning theory nerd. How dogs and people learn is as important to me as training the dog to do a behavior.


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

You mean reactive on the field, during a routine? Or reactive in everyday life (not behavorially - I know that's not how you are using the word), when you are just trying to teach the dogs things?


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

The latter. I have two such dogs, complete failures with freeshaping. One is my mutt dog that is pretty low drive (enough drive for food but looses interest fast, easily distracted) and the other is my working line female GSD who is a softy. Both of these dogs have to be lured. One doesn't have the attention span for free shaping or the desire to be working with me for more than 2 seconds, and the other gets stressed when there are no obvious cues or commands. She can't really push to solve a problem whether it is positive training or pressure training. Both dogs I would say are "reactive" as far as training goes, not on the field. They learn behaviors by "reacting" to my cues, lures, tools, etc. They are less likely to "offer" or "throw" behaviors indefinitely until they figure out what earns the reward.

An easier example.... a lot of people have trouble starting the hold of the freeshaped retrieve because their dog will not interact at all with the dowel. They just sit there and wait for some cue or help from the handler. The proactive dog will nose-touch it, put their mouth on it, paw at it, etc.


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

For something like heeling and it's various subcomponents (left turns, around turns, finish) - how much can you freeshape before you go: "Okay, kiddo, now I am going to show you how I want you to do it." It's not hard to freeshape attentive heeling (to get the dog to look up at your face while keeping pace on your left side) but not attentive heeling in the style that you necessarily want.


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Liesje said:


> An easier example.... a lot of people have trouble starting the hold of the freeshaped retrieve because their dog will not interact at all with the dowel. They just sit there and wait for some cue or help from the handler. The proactive dog will nose-touch it, put their mouth on it, paw at it, etc.


But don't you think a pup with the proper drive will grab it anyway - but that doesn't necessarily means he is a thinking, proactive dog. In fact, one might say he is reactive. Object in front of him -> Drive kicks him -> Bite. I mean if I wave a dowel in front of a crazy malinois pup, he is going to grab it, no doubt about that. He wants to interact with it to begin with. It's once the pup has that thing in his mouth that we got work to do.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Good question, I don't typically use pure freeshaping for heeling. I use sort of a combination of methods. If I have the dog as a puppy (like Pan for example) I start by rewarding the dog for eye contact in basic position and do this for a loooong time. At the same time I have the dog move around with me basically eating out of my hand. I don't really consider this luring or freeshaping because what I aim to do is actually physically condition the dog to move with me keeping his body straight (not wrapping) and pushing up into my palm for food. Pan is six months and still all we do as far as heeling is me feeding him while he's learning to "collect" in the rear, and then doing eye contact in basic position. When he's a bit older I'll move on to a more lure/reward type method either with a ball or food or both. Nikon's heeling is more of a "bribe" type heeling where I show him his ball, then drop it, then give the command and a stiff correction if it's needed, we heel around, and when I'm satisfied I release him to go get the ball. I know a lot of people train heel completely by using a ball lure in their armpit or up by their face but that doesn't work with Nikon, he gets too obsessed with the ball and doesn't actually *learn* what Fuss means so he's flat without his ball. Instead I tease him with the reward, get it off me, and go. He's the type of dog that gets better and "punchier" with some prong pops, doesn't shut him down but gets him going so I've used that a lot with heeling. It's funny you ask about heeling because that is one area where I've tried every method under the sun for the sake of experimentation. I don't know if the dog will ever free heel to his full potential but it's been an interesting trip!


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Jason L said:


> But don't you think a pup with the proper drive will grab it anyway - but that doesn't necessarily means he is a thinking, proactive dog. In fact, one might say he is reactive. Object in front of him -> Drive kicks him -> Bite. I mean if I wave a dowel in front of a crazy malinois pup, he is going to grab it, no doubt about that. He wants to interact with it to begin with. It's once the pup has that thing in his mouth that we got work to do.


LOL I was thinking this as I wrote it, I was thinking about my TD's crazy Malinois. I think there is a line between being a thinking, proactive dog and a dog that is simply overloaded but it's up to the handler to know their dog and see the difference (if the difference even matters....) I guess the main difference I'd see in this example is the dog having drive FOR the object. Personally when doing retrieves I like the dowel or dumbbell to be neutral, I don't build drive for the object and if the dog shows too much excitement over the object then I back off and try something else or wear the dog down a bit before trying that exercise. Also if you are free shaping you would not wave the dowel, no extra cues or motions to entice the dog to interact, you would just hold it in front and present it. I tried to start freeshaping Pan's hold and had to quit because he looked at the dowel and SNAPPED his head back to me. We've done so much work with eye contact it was though he saw it and thought, "Ah ha! This is another trick trying to get me to look away!" (I've been reinforcing the eye contact by holding treats a centimeter off his nose and stuff like that).


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Hogan grabbed the DB as soon as presented. Yes, sort of reactive in that way. 

But, perhaps with something less innate as biting what in front of one's mouth there would be a better example. A dog and a box for instance. Dogs who have more shaping experience may be more likely to offer you a lot of behaviors with that box. A more "reactive" dog is going to look to the handler for direction.

I use shaping for some behaviors. I use very hands on methods for others. A big time shaped dog makes me a bit crazy with all that offering. It seems strange to me somehow.


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Samba said:


> But, perhaps with something less innate as biting what in front of one's mouth there would be a better example. A dog and a box for instance. Dogs who have more shaping experience may be more likely to offer you a lot of behaviors with that box. A more "reactive" dog is going to look to the handler for direction.


I believe if you put a box in front of Hogan he will bite the box ...


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

JKlatsky said:


> Debbie Zappia does a lot of free shaping, if you ever get a chance to see one of her seminars. For me...*I think it's difficult to start free shaping an older dog.* I don't really have the patience for free shaping- I prefer a lure and a marker.


Hu--interesting! We've started doing some free shaping in my OB lessons with Debbie and I feel the opposite. But maybe it's because Elsa is the type of dog that naturally offers behaviors when we're training. In one session working on free shaping for "stand" I think we've made a ton of progress. For whatever reason, it's one of those things that I've never been able to get down and I really wanted to try a different approach.

I also used freeshaping (of sorts) with a clicker for our SAR indication--paw slap to the thigh--and it took about 5 minutes  (although I did use a target on my leg the first couple tries). I gues not total freeshaping in that my target was being used as a "tool"..........but she was getting rewarded for each more active action towards the hand on my thigh. By the third attempt she was pawing my leg and has been completley consistent on it since then.


----------



## JKlatsky (Apr 21, 2007)

GSDElsa said:


> Hu--interesting! We've started doing some free shaping in my OB lessons with Debbie and I feel the opposite. But maybe it's because Elsa is the type of dog that naturally offers behaviors when we're training. In one session working on free shaping for "stand" I think we've made a ton of progress. For whatever reason, it's one of those things that I've never been able to get down and I really wanted to try a different approach.
> 
> I also used freeshaping (of sorts) with a clicker for our SAR indication--paw slap to the thigh--and it took about 5 minutes  (although I did use a target on my leg the first couple tries). I gues not total freeshaping in that my target was being used as a "tool"..........but she was getting rewarded for each more active action towards the hand on my thigh. By the third attempt she was pawing my leg and has been completley consistent on it since then.



I guess in my experience with it (and my limited patience could be a mitigating factor) dogs who have had a good amount of training without any free shaping will just kind of wait for you to give them some kind of clue on what to do. Personally, I found trying to free shape behaviors with my older dogs an exercise in frustration.  Yes they would offer behaviors (behaviors they already knew) but they wouldn't try new behaviors and after several minutes would be convinced that I wasn't actually training and lay down. I felt like a lot of free shaping is dumb luck waiting for them to accidentally perform the correct behavior, capture it with a clicker, and then hope they do it again until they make some correlation in their brain that X causes Y. If you've watched Debbie you've probably seen her do a fair amount of work with boards on the ground and how she free shapes the behavior of the dog putting his feet on the board as a tool for various position exercises. I was trying to do that at home..and gave up because in the time I was trying to free shape it I could have just lured him up onto the board, marked it with a clicker and been done. Which is what I ended up doing. 

Now PUPPIES that I have started with early free shaping were considerably more fun to work with. They are easier to start behaviors with because they have no previous training and are more likely to do things. Their curiosity seems to be a major help. We free shaped Anka's article indication and lots of foundation pieces with Cade and Tag. I think once you start that kind of learning, the dog's do better thinking through things. But I'll admit, I still prefer a lure and a marker to teach a behavior. It's just easier and more logical for ME.


----------



## TNGSD (Feb 15, 2008)

I found an old video of Haley with a dog we used to have that was a wiz at free shaping. He was terrified of men and low confidence so we used a clicker and free shaping to raise his confidence. He would throw behaviors like no dog I've ever seen. We got him when he was 2 years old and tried to make up for the years that he had no socialization. We never could get him to not release his anal glands when he saw my husband.we finally found a family for him... but I still think of him everyday!


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Haha... Yes, Jason, Hogan is pretty much limited to that in offered behaviors...


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

JKlatsky said:


> If you've watched Debbie you've probably seen her do a fair amount of work with boards on the ground and how she free shapes the behavior of the dog putting his feet on the board as a tool for various position exercises. I was trying to do that at home..and gave up because in the time I was trying to free shape it I could have just lured him up onto the board, marked it with a clicker and been done. Which is what I ended up doing.


I LOVE the boards! lol. But maybe because I have a dog that is obsessed with climbing on things...she was like "Ohhh Something to climb on?! YES! Again?! YES! Another time?! YES!"

A couple lessons ago I was keeping treats on a table and running back and forth to get Elsa excited...at one point she decided that maybe what I wanted with all this running around was for her to jump up on a empty chair and sit there  I have a strange dog...but I guess is a freeshaping dream.


----------



## vomlittlehaus (Aug 24, 2010)

JKlatsky said:


> Debbie Zappia does a lot of free shaping, if you ever get a chance to see one of her seminars. For me...I think it's difficult to start free shaping an older dog. I don't really have the patience for free shaping- I prefer a lure and a marker.


Okay, thats why all this sounds like what I am doing (or did) to train Yoko. We just called it shaping. Didnt know it was more specific to free-shaping. My trainer is a student (has been for several years) of Debbie.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Zahnburg said:


> Interesting....I'm thinking.


No thoughts to share yet?  I'm curious what your motivation was for starting this thread - are you interesting in trying it? Or is there another reason?


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

JKlatsky said:


> I guess in my experience with it (and my limited patience could be a mitigating factor) dogs who have had a good amount of training without any free shaping will just kind of wait for you to give them some kind of clue on what to do.





> Now PUPPIES that I have started with early free shaping were considerably more fun to work with. They are easier to start behaviors with because they have no previous training and are more likely to do things.


I agree, dogs who "get" shaping because they've done it in the past will pick up new behaviors much faster than dogs who are used to being told what to do. So maybe frustrating at first, but if you're willing to stick it out, you will end up with a dog that is enthusiastically trying things to see what works. And definitely starting out from scratch with a puppy is great. I had never heard of capturing behaviors until after we got Cassidy. With Dena, Keefer, and Halo I did a ton of it, clicking and treating for any behavior I liked and wanted to encourage, from the time I got them at 9/10 weeks old. 

I also do a lot of luring, but then you've got to fade the lure. So when I can get the behavior without luring, that's one less step to worry about. When I started mat training with Halo it only took one training session of about 10 minutes with a clicker and some low and high value treats to get her to go to the mat, spin around, and do an automatic down on it with eye contact. After that all I had to do was name it, start adding distance and moving the mat to various locations.


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> No thoughts to share yet?


No, nothing to share, yet. I am just reading.



Cassidy's Mom said:


> I'm curious what your motivation was for starting this thread - are you interesting in trying it? Or is there another reason?


Do you think I have some sinister motive?


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

The part that I am not entirely convinced about is the idea that if you take one exercise, two dogs and train dog A with freeshaping and dog B with classical conditioning, that dog A will be clearer about the exercise than dog B.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

How will we test this clarity?


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

To clarify: The argument "free shaping teaches the dogs to think and problem solve and this in turn makes it easier to teach them new things" I find convincing. My problem is to go from that to saying that a thinking dog is clearer on his platz (or his retrieve or his send out) than a classically conditioned dog or a compulsion trained dog.


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Samba said:


> How will we test this clarity?


Take voraus for example. If you can take a dog to a strange field and send him and he will run and run and run like his butt is on fire until you tell him to stop. Then I would say the dog is clear on the command. The only dogs that I've seen done that are dogs with forced voraus. This is NOT to say you can't freeshape a strong clear voraus like that. I am not arguing that at all. But my point is that kind of clarity can also be achieved through compulsion.


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

Liesje said:


> They learn behaviors by "reacting" to my cues, lures, tools, etc. They are less likely to "offer" or "throw" behaviors indefinitely until they figure out what earns the reward.


I think Madix/I fall somewhere in the middle. Which makes us kind of failures for both classical conditioning and true freeshaping. He will throw behaviors - that he already knows and depending on my response will then either 1. get frustrated and try something new or 2. lay down and wait for the next cue. For the retrieve it wasthe former - I just kept backing away from him, creating interest in the fact that SOMETHING was expected rather than just a down and finally (out of frustration) he grabbed the dowel - click and treat and I saw the little light bulb go on 



Liesje said:


> *I think there is a line between being a thinking, proactive dog and a dog that is simply overloaded* but it's up to the handler to know their dog and see the difference (if the difference even matters....) I guess the main difference I'd see in this example is the dog having drive FOR the object. *Personally when doing retrieves I like the dowel or dumbbell to be neutral*, I don't build drive for the object and if the dog shows too much excitement over the object then I back off and try something else or wear the dog down a bit before trying that exercise. Also if you are free shaping you would not wave the dowel, no extra cues or motions to entice the dog to interact, you would just hold it in front and present it. *I tried to start freeshaping Pan's hold and had to quit because he looked at the dowel and SNAPPED his head back to me.* We've done so much work with eye contact it was though he saw it and thought, "Ah ha! This is another trick trying to get me to look away!" (I've been reinforcing the eye contact by holding treats a centimeter off his nose and stuff like that).


I very much agree with this. I've never had a dog that "loaded" before (my Lab is LAZY) so that fine line was hard for me to determine! I errored on the side of control vs overdrive because honestly when I started training, I had no idea what to do with him in overdrive lol. 

I also like the dog to be doing the "job" because he wants to work for me and not the object. In this case, the dowel is neutral although he gets excited to see it b/c that means we will be training. Same excitement when I get the perch out. However, if I put the dowel on the floor to work on something else - he leaves it there no problem. 

I trained Madix eye contact the SAME way and ran into much the same problems...except more so because when I started Schutzhund he was much older than Pan and we very rarely lured so when I tried luring with me, he was totally confused and offering INTENSE eye contact like his life depended on it. That's why I use a lot of body movement (which Ron hates) to get him moving himself as he has more of a tendency to offer behaviors in that state. 



Jason L said:


> To clarify: The argument "free shaping teaches the dogs to think and problem solve and this in turn makes it easier to teach them new things" I find convincing. My problem is to go from that to saying that a thinking dog is clearer on his platz (or his retrieve or his send out) than a classically conditioned dog or a compulsion trained dog.


For me, it seems that the thinking dog has taken the steps to get there and understands WHY he is doing it and the EXACT thing because he has tried other things with no reward. A classically conditioned dog has been more...pushed or convinced into it and therefore there is room for that dog to ask "well, if that is good, what about this?". Making more mistakes AFTER the behavior is "learned". Does that make any sense? 

I guess in my head, it's like if someone gave me verbal cues for figuring something out hands on and if someone took my hands and guided them for me. I know, for myself, that I learn better when I have to "figure" it out myself rather than being shown - but I need to be hands on for either to work really....am I rambling? lol


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

I see what you are saying. I guess how I look at it is if a classically conditioned dog makes a mistake, then I correct the mistake and if my correction is well timed, then the dog should achieve some sort of clarity through this game of yes and no, hot and cold, right and wrong.

Probably a lot of it also depends on the temperament of the trainer. If someone try to freeshape me into doing something, I would be ANNOYED. My attitude would be: "Just [email protected]#% tell me what you want me to do already and I'll do it!" But that's just me lol.


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

Jason L said:


> I see what you are saying. I guess how I look at it is if a classically conditioned dog makes a mistake, then I correct the mistake and if my correction is well timed, then the dog should achieve some sort of clarity through this game of yes and no, hot and cold, right and wrong.


Yes, that is what Lies is saying though. Where once her dog has it "figured out" he's done. If you classically condition, you get those "mistakes" that you correct. The end result might come at the same time but you get to skip the oopses after the learned behavior with free-shaping.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have tried to free shape some behaviors and then ended up just showing the dog what was wanted. They do look at me like, Why didn't you just show me in the first place? We could have saved a lot of time and aggravation".


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

OK Jason I will give you that the dog may not always understand the behavior better. I think what it means to me is that you can't rush freeshaping, so if it is done right and completely, there's no chance of the dog being confused or messing up. On the other hand I see a lot of people rush lure/marker training, escape training, etc (myself included). The retrieves are a great example. Again, as a disclaimer I have NOTHING against a really nice, clean forced retrieve but my experience with this method is that I've seen several novice people end up with a retrieve that really wasn't even worth doing, and have to spend months cleaning up this or that part of the behavior chain. By definition, when you freeshape a retrieve these issues don't happen unless for whatever reason some conflict is introduced later on, because with freeshaping you would never move on to the next step until the dog is clean and clear in his understanding of the step you are on. I love watching Claudia Romard's dog do a nice retrieve with a helper standing there. It's clear that the dog absolutely understands that exercise, knows exactly what to do at each step in order to "win" the release to packen.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Jason L said:


> Take voraus for example. If you can take a dog to a strange field and send him and he will run and run and run like his butt is on fire until you tell him to stop. Then I would say the dog is clear on the command. The only dogs that I've seen done that are dogs with forced voraus. This is NOT to say you can't freeshape a strong clear voraus like that. I am not arguing that at all. But my point is that kind of clarity can also be achieved through compulsion.


I think this is a good example. Most voraus I see to work well would have to put the marker out once or twice to "warm up" the dog.

I think the issue I see with force is not so much having to use force or the dog being clear but often I see force/escape used in patterns or pairing exercises, and when that pattern is broken the dog shows anxiety and stress. A friend of mine bought a trained dog from Germany and when it arrived, he took the dog tracking. He laid a basic SchH1 track to see where the dog was at. The article was towards the end of the second leg. He observed that as the dog went on, he started becoming almost frantic and showing a lot of stress. The dog was trained to track and trained to indicate with force, so the article was his "safe" zone and when he didn't find it early on in the track, he starting getting anxious anticipating the pressure.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have often wondered about the biting the helper as a reward for a complex obedience behavior. I am not sure I understand that in relation to the attitude of protection work.

With the dog who showed stress in tracking, perhaps the trainer was not clear. Perhaps the dogs make up was such the it did that under some pressure. The technique was not necessarily the thing that got that result...could be the skill of trainer or genetics of the dog.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Samba said:


> With the dog who showed stress in tracking, perhaps the trainer was not clear. Perhaps the dogs make up was such the it did that under some pressure. The technique was not necessarily the thing that got that result...could be the skill of trainer or genetics of the dog.


That is part of the point though. We can discuss training methods in a vacuum but it doesn't happen that way. I've seen too much escape training used by people and on dogs that had no business doing it that way.

Likewise, freeshaping has it's own criticisms and drawbacks (takes too long, too much patience, dog can learn it faster another way...)


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Liesje said:


> I think the issue I see with force is not so much having to use force or the dog being clear but often I see force/escape used in patterns or pairing exercises, and when that pattern is broken the dog shows anxiety and stress. A friend of mine bought a trained dog from Germany and when it arrived, he took the dog tracking. He laid a basic SchH1 track to see where the dog was at. The article was towards the end of the second leg. He observed that as the dog went on, he started becoming almost frantic and showing a lot of stress. The dog was trained to track and trained to indicate with force, so the article was his "safe" zone and when he didn't find it early on in the track, he starting getting anxious anticipating the pressure.


I have seen that in forced track dogs - mostly in dogs that have been forced track recently and have not had the some pressure taken off him and, of course, in badly trained dogs. A lot of time they will lie, lie, lie on the track because they are compelled to go forward no matter what.

But just as compulsion can go haywire, couldn't a freeshape exercise go haywire too? I need to think of a scenario. But I am intrigued by the claim that once an exercise is freeshaped, it's done and no more mistake.


----------



## G-burg (Nov 10, 2002)

> But just as compulsion can go haywire, couldn't a freeshape exercise go haywire too? I need to think of a scenario. But I am intrigued by the claim that once an exercise is freeshaped, it's done and no more mistake.


As we all know nothing is 100%.. even more so when dealing with dogs.. they're gonna have off or bad days or do something that leaves you scratching your head..


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

Jason L said:


> But just as compulsion can go haywire, couldn't a freeshape exercise go haywire too? I need to think of a scenario. But I am intrigued by the claim that once an exercise is freeshaped, it's done and no more mistake.


I can't think of any way for the freeshaping to go haywire except that a dog that is used to offering behavior may be annoying when doing so thinking you want it, when you really don't...



G-burg said:


> As we all know nothing is 100%.. even more so when dealing with dogs..


I also agree with this - no matter the training technique.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

G-burg said:


> As we all know nothing is 100%.. even more so when dealing with dogs.. they're gonna have off or bad days or do something that leaves you scratching your head..


Absolutely.

Jason, when I originally posted it was in the context of Art's other thread where I said I use freeshaping for the voraus. It is in that context that I think a freeshaped voraus gives the dog a better understanding of the actual behavior. I see way to many where the dog is clearly just running out to look for a marker or a reward at the end of the field. A dog and perform the exercise perfectly because it knows to run straight and fast with his head up and had better platz when the command comes, but as far as what the dog is actually thinking, most times the dog is still running out to a marker and happens to be interrupted by a well-proofed platz command. If the dog really understands that voraus = run away fast and straight, it should be able to do it anytime, anywhere without having to be warmed up with the marker. It should be able to run 10 feet and platz or twice the distance of the SchH field and platz. When you freeshape the behavior correctly, the dog WILL understand the behavior because that is precisely what you are building. When you use the marker, the dog probably doesn't really understand it but may or may not be able to do it in a new context. Again, as long as the dog can do it correctly as far as passing the exercise, to most people this distinction doesn't and shouldn't matter. I actually like the idea of pairing it with the retrieve so that there is always a "jackpot" type reward at the end (favorite toy, can of sardines, etc).

Another example is running blinds. Many dogs run blinds as a pattern, could probably do the entire exercise without the handler, never check the blind, etc. Out of curiosity and boredom I freeshaped blind running at home. At this point, as an obedience exercise, the dog will run any blind I direct to in any order and will return to me and platz until or unless I give the direction to the next blind. "Voran" means "run out and check the blind I point to, then return and wait for the next command".

Again, it's not that one way is "better", it's just a way of looking at it more from the point of view of the dog and trying to break down how the dog is learning and WHAT the dog is learning. There are a lot of things I train by pattern training or a train the dog to do something because the dog *thinks* something will happen or be there and that's as much as the dog really understands. To what extent these things matter just depend on the handler. To me having an absolutely solid "platz" command at any distance and/or with motion is crucial so I trained it using escape training. If a safety issue is involved, I don't care that the dog only understands platz = lay down or be flattened by the handler. Same thing with Coke digging out of my fence, I used an e-collar and stimmed him when he got too close to the fence. I don't care if he ever makes the connection that staying inside the fence is fun and safe; if his understanding is simply that certain areas of the fence = ouch, that is fine with me because that association keeps him safe.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I am thinking they can still makes mistakes. It would depend on a lot of circumstances as to how something is defined as "a mistake". 

I think a lot of behaviors can be shaped nicely. I have done it but usually now go to luring or actually physically placing the dog. I know that is passe in today's dog training world. I have always been told the dog learns it "better" if the do it all themselves. I am not convinced of that, but it is certainly okay with me if no one else utilizes this.

Just shaping seldom results in the performance I require, but I have found it to be a good beginning or part of the foundation for a behavior. 

When shaping has been done, it seems to inspire creativity in my dogs. Rather than do it consistently they sometimes add their own flair or additions or superstitions. Entertaining anyway. Got to be careful who you encourage to think!


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I lure a lot to, especially simple things that a dog will learn in less than half a dozen reps regardless of whether it's lured or shaped. Perch work for example. Nikon's was all freeshaped, but Pan's is lured (lure him onto the perch, C/T, use the treat and/or body cues to move him around C/T). Both learned it very fast, neither is really better than the other. Pan is more food motivated right now so his borders on getting frantic and not being able to really *think* other than "FOODFOODFOODFOOD!!"


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Oddly appropriate to what we are talking about here:

0:22 onward:


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

I want to thank everyone for their input, in particular thanks Lies for your insight and Jason for your critical questioning (if you ask questions I don't have to. Which is good for me because everyone thinks I am an ******* anyway, and when I ask a question everybody thinks I am just more of an *******.)
If anyone else has more to offer I would love to get more input.
On a side note; Jason, Is it just me or does Ricky Gervais look a lot like Fred Flintstone?


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

Ok, I posted and I see I have ********
Those **********


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

If anyone subscribes to the WDJ the Feb issue has an interesting article "Positive Protection" 
It delves into compulsion/pressure vs positive /free-shaping reinforcement, mostly within the police K9 circles.

Art~are you ok?


----------



## Zahnburg (Nov 13, 2009)

onyx'girl said:


> Art~are you ok?


Do you mean am I ok because I started a thread about free-shaping?
or
Do you mean am I ok because everyone thinks i am an *******?
or 
Do you mean am I ok because I think Ricky Gervais looks like Fred Flintstone

In any event, yes, I am still of sound mind and body (well as sound as it has ever been anyway)


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I agree about Fred, and I really don't think anyone thinks you are an *****
these discussions make the board less bored!


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

He does look like Fred ...


----------



## Northern GSDs (Oct 30, 2008)

onyx'girl said:


> I agree about Fred, and I really don't think anyone thinks you are an *****
> these discussions make the board less bored!


I agree! It is training discussion threads such as this that motivate me to come back to the forum.

Other than that, I don't have much to add to free-shaping aside from the fact that I wonder if many of us have used it without consciously attributing a "name" to the technique? I suppose I unknowingly used "free shaping" for attention/focus and I do think it has worked well indeed. 

This has been a very interesting thread - always good to expand our "training minds" :thumbup:


----------



## Jason L (Mar 20, 2009)

Lies talked about this in her earlier post: freeshaping makes you a better trainer because it forces to take your time, read the dog, and train in steps. In other words, freeshaping really brings the concept and practice of successive approximation to the forefront. And this I absolutely agree with. Too often when I try to teach something new, I get bogged down with thoughts like: "Well, that looked like crap! It looks nothing like what I want" and then have to remind myself: one step at a time. You can't go from the dog not getting it at all to getting it all in one day.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

I just saw the videos and I didn't like at least the first one. Without knowing I did a lot of that with my Border Collie. But I ended up with a dog that did 100 different things... halfway. At the end she could or could not do a lot of "tricks" with food present and in given circumstances and controlled environments. Diabla knows how to do 1/5 of the same things, but she is 99% reliable with or without rewards, everywhere and with attitude. That kind of methods are good to start, but do not constitute the training itself until the behaviors are more mature and are not obedience if you can't take them to real life.

Notice I'm not criticizing free-shaping, though I don't do it, I'm criticizing the Great Dane video.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Dogs are so easy to help and show, I could never get in to those "guessing games". If I had a whale it might be different.


----------



## G-burg (Nov 10, 2002)

> Dogs are so easy to help and show, I could never get in to those "guessing games". If I had a whale it might be different.


Exactly! 

Why all the guessing or making the dog go through all the un-necessary behaviors when you can teach/show right from the beginning.. I almost think it's cruel and unfair at times.. I want my dog to clearly understand what it is I want from the get go..

What's that saying.. "Keep it simple, stupid" But hey, that's me and how I like dog training..


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

If the dog has to run through a routine of offered behaviors or is stumped, then it's not the freeshaping that's the problem but how the handler is using it. It really shouldn't be that complicated for dog or handler. If someone is freeshaping perch work, I don't see why it would take more than 2 minutes of work for the dog to get on the perch and understand that front feet on the perch=reward. If someone is starting the dumbbell hold the dog should be taking and holding the dumbbell within a few sessions.

Personally I think freeshaping works best when backchaining something that's really a chain of behaviors (like a formal retrieve). These will take time and precision regardless of what method you use. For simpler things I don't freeshape either, as there is no real benefit since most behaviors a dog will learn in just a few reps regardless of how you set it up (stand, sit, down, finish, etc). Also there are times I just am not in the mood for gimmicks like this collar, that leash, etc, etc. Just give me the dog and whatever the dog wants for the reward and lets go train! Sometimes I see people spending more time "dressing" their dog with all these collars and tools, they take longer than me getting ready for work in the morning. 

For my Schutzhund dogs I'd say 75% of my training is of the "luring"/showing-the-dog-what-I-want variety, 15% freeshaping, 10% pure aversive escape training. That is just the *training* phase. Eventually there are always corrections/consequences. I have noticed that the freeshaped behavior chains have required little to no fixing or corrections once trained. Same with the escape training behaviors.


----------

