# Progression to a random reward scheme...



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

I was wondering whether anyone could share their own methods of reward progression in training (particular actions as well?), preferably from those who use marker or clicker training. Because it's all well and easy to teach a dog to sit, then sit for duration, sit under distraction for duration etc. But I have the most difficulty with reward progression. My current reward progression is based on Michael Ellis' scheme:

constant > variable > random

But I still am struggling to understand what I should be doing after I deliver the reward cue mark, in a variable-off or random-off segment. It just seems awkward - for instance, if I'm rewarding every second turn, what do I do when I deliver my reward cue mark on a non-reward delivering round? My resources don't teach this is any great detail - so I praise my dog, but naturally she's frantically searching for her reward (food).I'm worried I may be counter-conditioning the mark and causing extinction. She has an absolutely manic and I mean MANIC food-drive.

So how is a non-reward turn training segment structured in your training sessions? Do any of you have different schemes for reward progression? Do you guys agree with the scheme I have described? Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Particularly, those of senior members and IPO/Schutzhund folks.


----------



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

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> But I still am struggling to understand what I should be doing after I deliver the reward cue mark, in a variable-off or random-off segment. It just seems awkward - for instance, if I'm rewarding every second turn, *what do I do when I deliver my reward cue mark on a non-reward delivering round?*


The marker ALWAYS means that a reward is coming, so if you're rewarding randomly, you're only going to mark the repetitions that you intend to reward. You can continue to praise, you just don't use your marker.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

For me, "random" never really means "random," it means the best out of a progressively higher number of performances. In the learning/shaping phase, every "more correct than the last" response might get rewarded. In the polishing phase, it's best out of 3, or best out of 5, or best version of whatever specific issue I'm trying to perfect. 

For example, right now I'm working on tightening Pongu's Fronts during formal retrieves, so today's criteria is that every Front within 4 inches of my toes gets rewarded, and every Front that's farther away gets a little bit of praise and then we reset the exercise to do it better next time.

I do not click (or mark) performances that aren't going to be rewarded. The ones that are good, but not good _enough,_ get a little bit of praise and then we go back and do it again.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> The marker ALWAYS means that a reward is coming, so if you're rewarding randomly, you're only going to mark the repetitions that you intend to reward. You can continue to praise, you just don't use your marker.


I'm still not sure how I do that though. You wouldn't be able to describe how you would conduct a training session on a random reward scheme would you? My main problem is that my dog will not break the action until I give the reward mark. Now I don't want to say something else, because that will probably just confuse the dog. 

But if I'm, say, teaching my dog to sit. She sits for duration, under distraction and has gone through a correction phase AND THEN I start to change my reward scheme, first to, let's say, a variable scheme. So I decide that I'm going to reward her variably, every 2nd sit. So I give her a commencement mark and we begin;

I tell her "sit"

she sits

then what? I kind of feel jarred, because I'm so used to using 'yes' as a "the action is over, good job, come get your reward" kind of mark. How do I get her to move out of sit and on to the next repetition? I can't tell her "sit", because she's obviously already sitting. I can't say to her "yes", because I'm only rewarding every second repetition. Should I just use leash pressure and pull her out of the sit? I'm quite confused....


----------



## boomer11 (Jun 9, 2013)

after you put her in a sit give her another command. do you want her to stand? do you want her to heel by your side and walk? do you want her to lay down? do you want her to know that training is over? if your dog is sitting under distraction and distance then just give her a here command and have her run to you. you can add a few commands together before rewarding. i mark with yes but my command to release my dog from training is "free". my dog either has to wait for another command or the word free before moving. 

another thing you can do is teach her the command "good". when she sits you can praise her and sometimes pet her and say good or whatever word you choose. she'll learn that the word good means shes doing it right but it doesnt release her from the command. this is how i add distance and duration to all my commands. i say good every few seconds so my dog knows its doing the command correctly and then at the end i will use my marker word and the dog is released and gets the reward. good just means the reward is eventually coming.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Merciel said:


> For me, "random" never really means "random," it means the best out of a progressively higher number of performances. In the learning/shaping phase, every "more correct than the last" response might get rewarded. In the polishing phase, it's best out of 3, or best out of 5, or best version of whatever specific issue I'm trying to perfect.
> 
> For example, right now I'm working on tightening Pongu's Fronts during formal retrieves, so today's criteria is that every Front within 4 inches of my toes gets rewarded, and every Front that's farther away gets a little bit of praise and then we reset the exercise to do it better next time.
> 
> I do not click (or mark) performances that aren't going to be rewarded. The ones that are good, but not good _enough,_ get a little bit of praise and then we go back and do it again.


But hypothetically, say that Pongu's Fronts were perfect, how would your random reward scheme look? You mentioned you're praising, so that's kind of like using your "duration/good" mark as a kind of reward or are you just giving general praise, does praise become a reward? but just an informal one?

In terms of exercises with very clearly defined beginnings and ends, such as sits and downs, how does your random scheme play out? If you have/had one. Is it the same as in retrieve? Does your praise come to signal the end of the action, in the eyes of your dog? Because then I won't use my duration mark as a praise, because that'll counter-condition my mark.

Furthermore, what happens BEYOND the random scheme, waaaaayyyy down the road. Once you guys have your commands down (and I'm talking about your bread and butter ones that your dog has mastered), how do you keep the dog motivated and avoid extinguishing the behaviour? Is it just about rewarding randomly? How does this play out in everyday life? Say you're down at the park and your dogs prong falls off or something and you put him/her in a down, or something happens and you have to use a command - how often are you rewarding that behaviour? how often do you do sessions for that behaviour? is it a matter of routinely having sessions for upkeep of a certain command or is that not necessary as long as the dog is keeping up quality behaviour?

Even the best training resources seem to really neglect the tail end of marker training - you don't need to answer all the questions, because I just read back and realised how many there are haha  

just if you or anyone has the time I could really use some help.

Regards


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

boomer11 said:


> after you put her in a sit give her another command. do you want her to stand? do you want her to heel by your side and walk? do you want her to lay down? do you want her to know that training is over? if your dog is sitting under distraction and distance then just give her a here command and have her run to you. you can add a few commands together before rewarding. i mark with yes but my command to release my dog from training is "free". my dog either has to wait for another command or the word free before moving.
> 
> another thing you can do is teach her the command "good". when she sits you can praise her and sometimes pet her and say good or whatever word you choose. she'll learn that the word good means shes doing it right but it doesnt release her from the command. this is how i add distance and duration to all my commands. i say good every few seconds so my dog knows its doing the command correctly and then at the end i will use my marker word and the dog is released and gets the reward. good just means the reward is eventually coming.


Thanks for the reply boomer. Those are good ideas. Linking commands just seems to confuse me more though  because I'd have to have all these actions trained simultaneously. I don't want her to start confusing down and sit by lumping them in the same training session, as that seemed to happen with her when I was initially training and I had to stop and rethink what I was doing. So you're saying that rather then reward her randomly, I should just link behaviours and reward the last one? Or not reward the last one?  I don't want to use my end mark "ok" because I don't want the session to end, I want to keep going and teach her that she's now only being rewarded every second go.

I use 'good' as a duration mark already, but she's gotten to the stage where she doesn't need it.


----------



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

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> I don't want to use my end mark "ok" because I don't want the session to end, I want to keep going and teach her that she's now only being rewarded every second go.


No time for more right now, I just wanted to quickly respond to this. If you're using "ok" to end your training sessions, what are you using as your release word? It doesn't matter what words you use, I just want to know if you have a word to release her from whatever command you've given. 

For me, "ok" releases the dog from the command, so if the dog is in a sit/stay or a down/stay, they can get up. If I'm ending a training session I use a different cue, such as "all done".

Also, one very good way to transition away from food rewards for easy behaviors that are learned and generalized (such as sit), is to use the command in day to day life to get the dog what they want. For example, you can have her sit until released while you put her food bowl down, and getting to eat is the reward, or sitting and looking at you to "make" you open the door and let her out or in, before putting on her leash for a walk, or before throwing a ball or letting her take a tug toy. She's still being reinforced for the sit, but you're not having to mark and reward with a treat each time.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> No time for more right now, I just wanted to quickly respond to this. If you're using "ok" to end your training sessions, what are you using as your release word? It doesn't matter what words you use, I just want to know if you have a word to release her from whatever command you've given.
> 
> For me, "ok" releases the dog from the command, so if the dog is in a sit/stay or a down/stay, they can get up. If I'm ending a training session I use a different cue, such as "all done".
> 
> Also, one very good way to transition away from food rewards for easy behaviors that are learned and generalized (such as sit), is to use the command in day to day life to get the dog what they want. For example, you can have her sit until released while you put her food bowl down, and getting to eat is the reward, or sitting and looking at you to "make" you open the door and let her out or in, before putting on her leash for a walk, or before throwing a ball or letting her take a tug toy. She's still being reinforced for the sit, but you're not having to mark and reward with a treat each time.


Hence why I started this thread haha 

maybe that's my problem. My marks are:

start session: ready
reward: yes
correction: no
duration: good
end session: ok

So I don't have a mark similar to your "ok". I suppose it would be "yes", but that indicates to her that she's getting a reward. Because formerly, when I was working by rewarding each repetition, "yes" served that purpose. 

Are you saying I need to create another mark for when I progress to a variable scheme? So that on the non-rewarding rounds, I can use that? 

Like say I make that mark "done" and I'm moving to a every 2nd repetition variable scheme:

# sit > done

# sit > yes (reward)

# sit > done

# sit > yes (reward)

^ is that kind of how I should structure it?

How do I charge that mark? Do I combine it with leash pressure or something? Because if I introduce a new mark, out of the blue, she won't know what I'm saying and she won't "release" herself....


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Sit-good
Down-good
Stand-good
Sit-yes

Shuffle and repeat.

David Winners


----------



## Jaythethird (Jul 1, 2013)

I click every time the behavior is performed. Oliver knows the mark means he is doing what I'm requesting. He also knows that this means he can be rewarded for doing behaviors that induce the clicking sound. Sit is the only time I treated after every click. Then with sit we weaned off the treat to learning to perform to achieve the mark also learning that with marks eventually comes reward. I do use verbal praise and physical praise frequently though. In the beginning I mark for every inch closer to performing the task. As he start to understand, I make a treat reward only for when he is performing the task pretty efficiently. On the random part, which isn't really random, I treat when I see that he is focusing solely on performing the task to his best level. So in perspective.. Let's say for sit, to explain an easy one, I still click every time his butt touches the ground. If he tries to sit down faster to achieve the mark or restrains himself from moving to a distraction and remained seated or anything else of the sort that proves he is performing a task of which he now understands with the thought of improving his performance in order to please me is when he gets a treat. I just get harder and harder to please. Then when we transition into real world, I don't mark the behavior, he is expected to perform the task because of his knowledge of what it is and that he knows it's something I would like him to do. He does get rewarded still though, so I implement it like someone previously stated, before he gets his food, in and outside, in and out of crate, in and out of the pickup, wanting a toy... 


Sent from my N860


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> I kind of feel jarred, because I'm so used to using 'yes' as a "the action is over, good job, come get your reward" kind of mark.


 
I didn't finish reading all the comments, but I think this ^ could be part of the issue. I use "yes/good" to mark the behavior, but that is not a release from the behavior. "Ok" is my release. So until told that or another command the dog needs to keep doing what it was told. I might try having a separate release command.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

You could just use the duration marker as the praise but if you needed to release the dog you could throw in "free" or "fine" and make a gesture like patting your hip to indicate you're ok with the dog breaking the command on that cue. The tone of voice indicates you were pleased plus the absence of a correction. I don't always feed on "goods" for duration even in the very beginning. For a new duration behavior I tend to feed more on goods at first but it is always variable and the dog is used to it. 

If you feed everytime on good and have up to this point I wouldn't be surprised if the dog showed his displeasure with you. Always reward on yes though. You also need to offer some sort of marker because no mark is almost as bad as saying "nope" or "no" for a high food drive dog.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

I think it can be helpful to have a variety of "markers" with different meanings. For example, I have 3.

"Yes" (verbal) and click from the clicker = reward markers and the reward will ALWAYS be forthcoming. To signal with a marker that is understood as an actual reward marker that will preceed a reinforcer, but then not provide the reward can confuse the dog and also damage trust.

"Good" = I liked that, good job, keep going/keep doing what you're doing and a reward will come. I would use this for a behavior that I wanted to mark as positive, but which isn't getting a reward either because while good it wasn't good enough for a reward or because I'm on a random schedule. This is possibly the sort of marker you are missing and may want to add?

"Free" = Release. If the dog is in a static position like sit/down/stand or an on-going exercise like heeling, the release serves both as a positive marker for a job well done and also as an end to that exercise. For me, the release typically is followed by some sort of reward either food, toy, play or petting, but not always.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> But hypothetically, say that Pongu's Fronts were perfect, how would your random reward scheme look? You mentioned you're praising, so that's kind of like using your "duration/good" mark as a kind of reward or are you just giving general praise, does praise become a reward? but just an informal one?
> 
> In terms of exercises with very clearly defined beginnings and ends, such as sits and downs, how does your random scheme play out? If you have/had one. Is it the same as in retrieve? Does your praise come to signal the end of the action, in the eyes of your dog? Because then I won't use my duration mark as a praise, because that'll counter-condition my mark.
> 
> ...


I don't know if I'm going to have time to answer everything in one post, but I'll do what I can and then try to come back and do the rest later. 

Pongu's Fronts will never all be perfect. They're mostly pretty good, but I'm playing for points in competition obedience, so "perfect" doesn't exist. His butt's tilted five degrees to the right? That's not perfect. He's two inches further away from my toes than I want? Not perfect. I have to guide him in with a hand gesture? Not perfect. There's always something in the criteria that can be raised or tightened.

The difficulty with training for competition (and I think this is true for any sport where you care about precision, so pretty much all of them except maybe lure coursing) is getting perfection without damaging attitude. To achieve this, I use a _lot_ of reinforcers, I vary them constantly, and I work really hard to keep my dog engaged and happy. This means that _everything_ gets some level of informal reward, even if it's just a little bit of praise and petting or an invitation to jump up or whatever else Pongu likes doing. Release to run around like a giant spaz can be a reward. Chasing me for five steps can be a reward. At this point, Heeling can be a reward, because I've built up the value of Heeling so much that Pongu really enjoys doing it.

While in the learning phase, I praise both during the exercise and after it. I use a lot of verbal encouragement because Pongu likes it and so it's effective. I give out a lot of treats, and I intersperse games of Tug (which at this point is not very useful as a reward because I still need to build up its value). Praise is not used to signal anything other than "hey good job, I like what you're doing." My end-of-work cue is "All done!" which means our training session is over until such time as doggypants can cajole me back into playing with him.

While in the polishing/competition preparation phase, I start thinning down the reinforcement rate. Rewards come only at the end of each exercise, then every few exercises, and so on, until I can basically get an entire Rally or obedience run with little/no reinforcement. Right now, I still reward occasionally in the ring, because it's allowed in the venues we do and I need the extra primary reinforcers to keep scaredypants fearful dog in the game under the additional stress of a trial environment. But at home he can do the whole run without immediate rewards. And eventually, over time, he'll be able to do it in a trial environment too.

It is important to sporadically reinforce each step in a chain so that you avoid anticipation problems. For example, in the Utility signal exercise, the order of signals is always the same: Halt, Down, Sit, recall/Front, Finish. If you do not reinforce the earlier steps in the chain separately during practice, you will get a dog who just goes on autopilot and does the entire chain without waiting to be cued separately for each part, and then you NQ. This might fall under the category of "problems you only have in dog sports" but it's still important to separately reinforce each step in the chain if you care about preserving the entire sequence. You don't have to reward every step in every session, but you do have to reward every step once in a while, or else it will break down over time.

If I need the dogs to do something outside then I just ask them to do it. I have built up the value of praise/play enough over time that I can use that as an okay reward if I don't have anything else handy. If I do have something else handy and whatever they did was particularly difficult (recalling off a cat chase is the hardest for them right now), then absolutely they get that reward. If it wasn't particularly demanding (holding a Sit-Stay while I scoop poop) then it just gets a little praise and we go on with our day.

...and now, having written all these disorganized thoughts, I realize that it doesn't begin to answer all your questions. No surprise; there are literally books and multi-day seminars devoted to these topics, because that's what it takes to cover them in depth. 

I would strongly suggest taking a look at Denise Fenzi's blog and her recent book on Dog Sports Skills, if you have the time/opportunity, and also Hannah Branigan's DVD set on Obedience FUNdamentals. Both of them are extremely accomplished R+/"clicker" obedience trainers and they go over a lot of the stuff you've asked about -- how to teach, perfect, and maintain some pretty challenging behaviors to a high degree of precision with very low reinforcement schedules.

It's a complicated, fascinating subject.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

Those Ellis DVDs go over that kinda thing too but leerburg has a way of splitting those DVDs up to get you to need several of them to get the picture of what you should be doing. It is definitely an artform though. You could always try emailing Cindy at leerburg to see if she knows any Ellis style trainers in your area. It's how I met up with mine who ended up being 15 min away from me. You can read about it and watch DVDs all day long but to a certain extent you need to go out there make the mistakes learn as you do it and it's a huge help to have a trainer there to point out your screw ups and help you iron everything out. Don't just stick to ellis either there are lots of great trainers out there with their own twists on training.

Just noticed you were an Aussie lol. Might not know a trainer there but I'm sure there are ring sports clubs there. Find them and check it out its a good place to start.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Baillif said:


> Those Ellis DVDs go over that kinda thing too but leerburg has a way of splitting those DVDs up to get you to need several of them to get the picture of what you should be doing. It is definitely an artform though. You could always try emailing Cindy at leerburg to see if she knows any Ellis style trainers in your area. It's how I met up with mine who ended up being 15 min away from me. You can read about it and watch DVDs all day long but to a certain extent you need to go out there make the mistakes learn as you do it and it's a huge help to have a trainer there to point out your screw ups and help you iron everything out. Don't just stick to ellis either there are lots of great trainers out there with their own twists on training.
> 
> Just noticed you were an Aussie lol. Might not know a trainer there but I'm sure there are ring sports clubs there. Find them and check it out its a good place to start.


 
Haha yeah, yanks are like "find a good trainer in your area...... ohh you're Australian" I'm in Sydney though so I do have the most access to dog training resources and sport clubs than any other city, especially since IPO/Schutzhund has been banned in Victoria, according to what I've read. 

Yes there are some IPO clubs near mine but it is quite limited, I really want to join one and take my little guy there but I'll have to get my affairs in order first and get his bite work up to a level that I won't be ashamed of when I walk in there.

I'm a huge fan of Ellis and Leerburg. I did a lot of research online and around shelters, pet shops initially, to see what I could dig up but there were mostly dog training "schools" run by people who weren't very educated. There are very high end training resources like those at k9 pro, but I honestly can't afford what they offer. So instead, I figured it would be cheaper to just use e-resources and video to assist me I think it works a charm personally. Their DVD's are a little expensive but once you buy a Michael Ellis DVD and watch the entire thing, it's as if a curtain has fallen and you begin to see dog training in a completely different light.

I would go out and explore other trainers but I'm really drawn to the whole Frawley - Ellis duo, nothing else that I've seen has really spoken to me as much.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

mycobraracr said:


> I didn't finish reading all the comments, but I think this ^ could be part of the issue. I use "yes/good" to mark the behavior, but that is not a release from the behavior. "Ok" is my release. So until told that or another command the dog needs to keep doing what it was told. I might try having a separate release command.





Baillif said:


> You could just use the duration marker as the praise but if you needed to release the dog you could throw in "free" or "fine" and make a gesture like patting your hip to indicate you're ok with the dog breaking the command on that cue. The tone of voice indicates you were pleased plus the absence of a correction. I don't always feed on "goods" for duration even in the very beginning. For a new duration behavior I tend to feed more on goods at first but it is always variable and the dog is used to it.
> 
> If you feed everytime on good and have up to this point I wouldn't be surprised if the dog showed his displeasure with you. Always reward on yes though. You also need to offer some sort of marker because no mark is almost as bad as saying "nope" or "no" for a high food drive dog.





Chris Wild said:


> I think it can be helpful to have a variety of "markers" with different meanings. For example, I have 3.
> 
> "Yes" (verbal) and click from the clicker = reward markers and the reward will ALWAYS be forthcoming. To signal with a marker that is understood as an actual reward marker that will preceed a reinforcer, but then not provide the reward can confuse the dog and also damage trust.
> 
> ...


Thankyou to everyone who has commented so far, you've all been very helpful. But I think after everything, that there are few options I have from this point on.

So, according to mycobraracr and balliff, I could start using a 'release' marker, which indicates to the dog that she is free from the behaviour (and provide informal praise?). So I could use this when my variable scheme, (sit - yes (feed) sit - free (praise) repeat etc.) then every 3rd time, every 4th time etc etc. So 'free' becomes a release but not a marker that precedes a reinforcer, as Chris stated.

or as Chris stated, I could use a "good" mark. But that to me, seems like a duration marker, so it wouldn't break behaviour. But a 'free' would. But you've stated that a 'free' might precede a reward but not always. I don't know whether I should have a variable reward marker, or just interchange a strict release marker (no formal reward) with a reward marker (formal reward).

The problem is, a dog needs continual motivation, and this is maintained once the behaviour is concrete on a random scheme, because it's not practical to have to feed the dog every single time he/she performs a behaviour. So the tail end of dog training involves balancing the maintenance of the behaviour with the departure from a reliance of constant reinforcement. But initially, you have to reinforce each behaviour, at the completion of that behaviour with a reward, accompanied by a reward marker. So the dog is conditioned to see behaviours having discrete beginnings and endings, with a reward mark, marking the 'end' and completion of that behaviour. 

So I think to solve my problem I'll start using a release marker, the dog will still receive informal praise, but these commands will only be reinforced randomly. So the majority of the time she will receive "free" which marks her release. And occasionally, she'll receive a "yes" to reinforce that behaviour. This is after I've gone through my variable phase, of course.

If anyone has anything else to share, please do so. Otherwise, I'll get to training my girl.


----------



## t.lesniak (Jan 4, 2010)

I have not read many replies. I apologize if this is redundant.
The quickest way to explain my system would just be an example of my reward schedule and commands.

"Right" means- you are correct, reward is likely.
"Good" means - good job, I'm pleased with you.
"Ok" means - your'e done.

Example:
Sit, Right, reward
Down, Right, reward
Stand, Good
Down, Right, reward
Sit, Right, Good, OK

I will vary where I throw "Good" in the sequence. And my dog's definition of "Right" does not guarantee reward, only that he was correct.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

good is the bridge word, yes is the marker and free is the release...



> The problem is, a dog needs continual motivation, and this is maintained once the behaviour is concrete on a random scheme, because it's not practical to have to feed the dog every single time he/she performs a behaviour


I will circle my dog(not me heeling in a circle, but him doing a circle or turn while in drive or to bring his drive level up), ask for up's or randomly reward to keep engagement. I also will circle him a couple times or ask for ups right after a correction to bring him back into engagement. Or you could do weaves between the legs during heeling. My dog is big, so I don't do that often!
Have you looked at Bridget Carlsen's methods? They aren't new to the sport world but the obedience people are taking her methods seriously and with good results. Increasing the duration of work ethic keeps the engagement level up so it isn't "factory work". 
Bridget Carlsen - Competition Obedience Training

I've also been advised whenever I do pattern train(which is very seldom) to give my dog the reward at the same spot, in the middle of the downfield heeling, then at the about turn, during the change of pace to slow heeling, again before going into the group, in the group....so when trialing the dog will ramp up when anticipating the rewards which never come in a trial.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

In the end it's all about gambling. Once you're on random reinforcement it's like the dog is playing the lottery. The associations you create with the commands stick with him too. Make the training a fun game and the dog finds value in obeying the commands and positive association with the work separately from the food reward.

For instance I get excited in the mere act of scratching off scratch off tickets regardless of whether they're winners or not, or opening a gift wrapped box even if it ends up being socks inside. The same mechanisms that trigger that kinda crap in our brains exist in the dog brain too.

Another thing to keep in mind is don't feed once for a mark all the time. It is predictable and boring. Mark feed feed feed. Mark feed feed feed feed feed. Mark feed. Mark feed feed feed feed. Don't give them all together too because the dog still interprets it as a single occurrence. Do it machine gun style. So while you will start to vary when your yes comes make sure you keep the reward amount and presentation varied too. Makes a huge difference just imagine if your paycheck sometimes came 2 to 5 times as large as normal or several more times per pay period as it does now. You'd probably like your job more.


----------



## tylernim (Nov 10, 2013)

I understand perfectly what Alwaysworkingdog is asking. That's because I came here tonight with the same question!

We're really mincing words, though. The term that is really making everyone in this thread hard to relate to one another is "release", and that's because in Ellis' training methods his reward maker(yes) is a release. He states that means ok cool you can move. Other than that there is a duration marker(good) which means stay in place or on to the next step of the exercise.

Alwaysworking is looking for way to tell the dog he/she can move, but without the a primary reinforcer(food) so that they can repeat the same exact command that was just completed.

Always I think we're looking at this as the answer.

Sit > Yes(food/release)

Sit > Ok(no food/release)

Sit > Yes(food/release)

Sit > Ok(no food/release)

Sit > Good(food), Good(food), Good(food), Yes(food/release)

etc...


Does that look ok to those of you with lots of experience?


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

That would work fine. You could also say

Sit> yes food release
Sit> good no food 
Stand > yes food release
Sit> yes food release 
Sit > good food 
Stand> good no food

You want to confirm the dog completed a command and the duration marker in this case the word good does that but also functions as a bridge and an affirmation


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

The end goal is to have a dog that will offer multiple behaviors without a reward. IMHO, if you are at a place in training that you are implementing a variable reward schedule, you wouldn't be asking for the same behavior time and time again.

Going through 30 repetitions of sit without any other commands would be terribly boring for the dog (and me) if that behavior was already solid. 

So if your marker is a release, you would run through positions in a random order with GOOD for correct display of behaviors and then MARK with big party after a chain of commands was correctly followed.

If your mark is not a release, then you could randomly GOOD or MARK while the dog was going through random position changes and then release and party at the end.

I start changing positions in the luring phase of training, long before verbal commands are added, so the dog is used to going through multiple position changes. I rarely do the same command over and over, as it's boring for me and the dog.

Sit-good
Down-good
Stand-good
Down-good
Sit-good
Stand-yes

Down-good
Sit-good
Stand-yes

Sit-good
Down-good
Stand-good
Front-yes

Down-yes

Play session... rinse and repeat

David Winners


----------



## Karla (Dec 14, 2010)

Leerburg has an excellent article on marker training.
Leerburg Dog Training | The Power of Training Dogs with Markers

Tylernim's post is right above me as I write this and he/she is on the right track.

Yes or click is the marker (bridge between the behavior and the reward) The yes or the click also ends the behavior, so what your dog does after the mark doesn't matter. It is a release without saying a word.

Words of praise, like gooooood, nice, etc. are used for duration. Dogs need to learn that praise is not a release. That's where a lot of people get mixed up in using praise as a release or the dog thinking that praise is a release.

If I am working on sit/stay, while my dog is staying, I can say gooood dog. I can also go reward while he's doing his sit/stay, but he has to wait for me to mark the behavior, "yes", or use my release word "ok".

I use ok as my release word. So, on a variable reinforcement schedule, I'm looking at marking the better performances of the behavior. If I'm not marking and rewarding, the dog does the behavior until given another command or released with an "ok".

Treats also have a value system. If the dog does the behavior but not as well as he could, he might get a piece of kibble. Not too exciting, but if he does the behavior really well, he either gets a piece of steak or something he really likes and possibly a jackpot.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

I was assuming tylernim was just using that as an example and not drilling the dog over and over on the same command, but yeah David's right you don't want to drill the dog because engagement is going to become a problem if you do. For the sport or even in general focused attention over an increasing period of time is pretty key so whatever you're doing needs to be entertaining enough to the dog to avoid causing the dog to check out.


----------



## Karla (Dec 14, 2010)

> Alwaysaworkingdog-So how is a non-reward turn training segment structured in your training sessions? Do any of you have different schemes for reward progression? Do you guys agree with the scheme I have described? Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Particularly, those of senior members and IPO/Schutzhund folks.


I don't mean to hi-jack this thread, but I do have a question that pertains to something you wrote.

You asked for thoughts particularly from senior members and IPO/Schutzhund folks. I have never tried Schutzhund, but I compete in AKC obedience and rally. Isn't marker training the same no matter what you are training?

My apologies if I should have started a new topic.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

It's the same but that doesn't mean you cant use your own style marker words or reward scheme. What does change is what is required in the movements. Some allow the dog to make forward movements during obedience some don't.


----------



## Bequavious (Mar 9, 2013)

onyx'girl said:


> good is the bridge word, yes is the marker and free is the release...
> 
> 
> I will circle my dog(not me heeling in a circle, but him doing a circle or turn while in drive or to bring his drive level up), ask for up's or randomly reward to keep engagement. I also will circle him a couple times or ask for ups right after a correction to bring him back into engagement. Or you could do weaves between the legs during heeling. My dog is big, so I don't do that often!
> ...


I discovered Bridget Carlsen a little while back because I really want that driven obedience instead of the sad submission you sometimes see, but I couldn't find anything that really outlined her methods. Mostly I just found really impressive videos of her working various dogs, and I was kind of wondering how I could learn more about her? Does she only do seminars or does she have a book or something too?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

You can get the exact same thing from Ellis, Balabanov, susan garrett and a bunch of others. It is all based on making them want to perform.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

It's not the _exact_ same thing. The principles of operant conditioning are the same, and all of them use some form of marker training, but there are subtle differences in methodologies and approach.

For example, Balabanov tends to use marker words rather than clickers, because he thinks the dog takes cues and motivation from the handler's voice, and you can use those words as a subtle form of praise and motivation. Plus, using marker words keeps your hands free, which can be pretty useful at times!

Susan Garrett's approach is to use _everything_ as a motivator, which in turn is partly rooted in really ultra hardcore NILIF (at least if you go by Ruff Love) and honestly that type of foundation goes a little more extreme than I'm personally comfortable with. She's also way more into free shaping than lure/reward training for everything -- which, again, is a little more extreme than I personally find useful. But her approach has gotten some truly spectacular results, so I'm certainly not going to argue it doesn't _work_.

So... very similar but not completely identical. Understanding the differences helps you understand why different approaches work in particular circumstances (and don't work in others, and/or may have costs or cause side effects you don't want), so IMO it's worth the time to really dig into _why_ those differences exist.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

True true


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Bequavious said:


> I discovered Bridget Carlsen a little while back because I really want that driven obedience instead of the sad submission you sometimes see, but I couldn't find anything that really outlined her methods. Mostly I just found really impressive videos of her working various dogs, and I was kind of wondering how I could learn more about her? Does she only do seminars or does she have a book or something too?


She mostly does seminars but she does have a DVD set available for sale: Bridget Carlsen - Competition Obedience Training. No book as far as I'm aware (which is a pity, as I get through books a _lot_ faster than I manage to whittle down my DVD backlist).

I haven't watched it myself so have no opinions on whether it's a good purchase. Maybe someday. I still have a lot of stuff to get through from Hannah Branigan and Ivan B. first.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Bridget is too busy training, trialing and doing seminars to probably sit down, let alone write a book! 
If you have a chance to hit a seminar with her, it is worth it.


----------



## Bequavious (Mar 9, 2013)

Merciel said:


> It's not the _exact_ same thing. The principles of operant conditioning are the same, and all of them use some form of marker training, but there are subtle differences in methodologies and approach.
> 
> For example, Balabanov tends to use marker words rather than clickers, because he thinks the dog takes cues and motivation from the handler's voice, and you can use those words as a subtle form of praise and motivation. Plus, using marker words keeps your hands free, which can be pretty useful at times!
> 
> ...


Thanks for this clarification! I'm trying to move into more advanced training, so I haven't learned all the well known trainers and their methods yet. I'm familiar with Ellis and I've watched Balabanov and Carlsen work, but haven't really seen their methods explained. It's so much easier (and cheaper lol!) to get information regarding basic training.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Bequavious (Mar 9, 2013)

Merciel said:


> She mostly does seminars but she does have a DVD set available for sale: Bridget Carlsen - Competition Obedience Training. No book as far as I'm aware (which is a pity, as I get through books a _lot_ faster than I manage to whittle down my DVD backlist).
> 
> I haven't watched it myself so have no opinions on whether it's a good purchase. Maybe someday. I still have a lot of stuff to get through from Hannah Branigan and Ivan B. first.


Haha yeah I like books caused can read anywhere, but it looks like a lot of the best people just do DVDs. It's probably easier to learn from watching, but books are just so convenient lol!


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Bequavious (Mar 9, 2013)

onyx'girl said:


> Bridget is too busy training, trialing and doing seminars to probably sit down, let alone write a book!
> If you have a chance to hit a seminar with her, it is worth it.


Haha well that's a good thing! I want to get a little more advanced first, but I think it would be a lot of fun to go.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Karla (Dec 14, 2010)

> Originally Posted by Merciel
> It's not the exact same thing. The principles of operant conditioning are the same, and all of them use some form of marker training, but there are subtle differences in methodologies and approach.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

I wouldn't think so no. Sport probably wouldn't matter there.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Karla said:


> It was more of a question why the OP wanted responses from Schutzhund people.


iirc (and I'm being lazy and not going back to look even though it's in the same thread) the request was for "senior members *or* Schutzhund people," which I took to basically mean "people who have actually gone out and put some titles on a dog, not Internet experts."

But who knows, you can always ask the OP.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> ...Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Particularly, those of senior members and IPO/Schutzhund folks.




David Winners


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Merciel said:


> "people who have actually gone out and put some titles on a dog, not Internet experts."


Basically that haha, I can't swear because I wrote something that I didn't know was considered a swear word on here once and got harassed by the naughty-word police, but there is a saying "Opinions on dog training are like ___holes, everybody's got one"

I have met a lot of people who have no idea how to train dogs, yet are more than willing to preach to you about what to do and what not to do, not that I'm as educated as I could be, but you have psychotic people who still practice compulsion and then you have the positive-only nut-jobs, in fact that's gotten so bad that I no longer feel comfortable taking my dog to the vet with a prong on, for fear of harassment.

I think you really have to be open-minded and take everything with a kind of cautious optimism. Just because someone is titled in a dog sport, does not make their style of training necessarily right for you, or right in general for that matter. Just because someone has been training for "x" amount of years, does not mean that everything they say is the gospel truth.

The big movement toward clicker training and positive reinforcement that occurred through the 90's really illuminated the fact that we shouldn't all just placidly accept the current way as the *right* way. You need to be a rebel occasionally, you need to constantly challenge anything you don't agree with, it's the only way that we'll get better at training our dogs.

I don't have a sport bias, just forgot for a second that people compete with their dogs in agility and obedience and what not, and that these are probably even more popular than protection. I guess I'm just caught up in the romantic world of the protection sports, hopefully I'll qualify as a helper one day myself.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Baillif said:


> I was assuming tylernim was just using that as an example and not drilling the dog over and over on the same command, but yeah David's right you don't want to drill the dog because engagement is going to become a problem if you do. For the sport or even in general focused attention over an increasing period of time is pretty key so whatever you're doing needs to be entertaining enough to the dog to avoid causing the dog to check out.


Now here's something interesting. I actually would take that drill literally. From what I've read from Ellis, you shouldn't start to train very similar commands (sit,down,stand) together, until it is very clear to the dog what the word means. My girl got extremely confused when I wrongly started to do linked commands before she had fully made the word-association, so she started offering, so I started from scratch, luring her again. So, at least in the beginning, you're going to need to drill over and over again, everybody does this, yet dogs don't lose engagement or motivation (unless you're doing it excessively of course)? Most training sessions should be short anyway, I' say 15 minutes max.

So I don't think that you and David are necessarily right in that respect. I don't think engagement pertains so much to what you're doing, this is evident in the myriad of activities we can teach a dog to do, a dog doesn't really care if it is doing a long down, or fetching the paper, or 'speaking', this is an artificial behaviour that we have created and made our dog perform. 

So, in contrast, *rather* I think engagement is more dependent on the value of the reward that the dog perceives it is going to receive *AND *the interactivity of that reward - Ellis talks about it in "Advanced Concepts in Motivation". I think that the repetitiveness of the activity does play a part, but it is minimal.

Look at something like tracking in Schutzhund, it's all about keeping the dog motivated and controlling pace, yet you're essentially drilling the same thing over and over again. Agility dogs train for the same course, over and over again. So I'm cautious about linking commands to early. Furthermore, a dog will often be expected to perform "boring" behaviours, such as long downs, and that dogs own resilience and trainability in this respect, is a testament to the motivation that the trainer has built up, I relation to the reward. 

I do like to mix unrelated commands early-on though, such as recall with sits and downs. I think the real benefit your dog gets from doing sessions with linked commands is providing further definition for what the command means and adding diversity so there is a sense of realism in your training to what you may actually be aiming at - e.g. Begleithundprüfung. I think it also provides context and links all your dogs training together. So it is critically important, but I wouldn't say that it is necessarily more engaging, simply on the basis that the dog is performing different exercises, and even then you might only be cycling between three or so.

So what do you guys think? To link or not to link?(of course you need to do this at some stage) At what level does your dog need to be at before you start linking commands? Do you agree or disagree with what I've said about engagement? Also, at what stage does your reward delivery open up to a variable or random scheme?


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> So what do you guys think? To link or not to link?(of course you need to do this at some stage) At what level does your dog need to be at before you start linking commands? Do you agree or disagree with what I've said about engagement? Also, at what stage does your reward delivery open up to a variable or random scheme?


I was under the assumption the dog was solid on verbal commands with no luring hence the move to a variable reward schedule. 

I link when luring, then work on single positions with a release at the mark while fading lure, then chain again once all positions are verbal only.

IME, keeping training fun includes not drilling the same thing over and over especially with a young dog. Your alluding to tracking and agility don't work for me as those are complex behaviors involving a myriad of skills. Completing a repetitive sit for 15 minutes straight can't be compared to running jumps for the same 15 minutes. But YMMV.

I think it also comes down to how motivated the dog is. If the dog isn't losing focus, keep doing what you're doing. The dog will let you know when it wants to do something else.

David Winners


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

How old is your dog always? I'm guessing you ran into issues with word association because you faded your lures and abbreviated gestures far too quick. I can quickly teach a dog exactly what I want command wise with the lure without ever putting a command on it. The command never comes into play until I can produce the exact movement I want with the lure. Don't name it till you love it and then don't fade the gestures too quickly and if the dog ever has issues you help them out with the gesture. By the time the gesture is faded out that dog should be super quick and fluent on the command without thinking about it. You shouldn't even be thinking variable reward schedule until that dog is fluent on those commands and has them down perfect. If you rush that too quickly it all breaks down. The way ellis teaches those commands and the order of them is meant to do it in a way that stops forward movement. Mondioring tags you with penalties for this but IPO does not.

If you are training a puppy 15 minute sessions are entirely too long.


----------



## Baillif (Jun 26, 2013)

Remind me tomorrow to show you two videos on what I mean by not drilling the dog.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Baillif said:


> If you are training a puppy 15 minute sessions are entirely too long.


It depends on your puppy and it depends what you're doing with your 15 minutes, I think.

w/r/t repetitive drilling ("do X, get a cookie. do X again, get another cookie," etc.), I agree with you. _That_ can get very boring very fast, no matter the age of your dog. Being a 1:1 cookie dispenser and nothing else will engage only the most food-driven dogs for long... and this ain't a Labrador forum. 

But I've been able to work with 8-week-old puppies for almost a full hour on end by varying our exercises, varying the payoffs, and building in play breaks (which are themselves tied back to foundational training for something or other).

This is sort of a roundabout way of saying that I can't answer Always's questions, because I don't _have_ fixed answers. It depends how the dog is responding in that particular session and what I'm trying to do.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Baillif said:


> How old is your dog always? I'm guessing you ran into issues with word association because you faded your lures and abbreviated gestures far too quick. I can quickly teach a dog exactly what I want command wise with the lure without ever putting a command on it. The command never comes into play until I can produce the exact movement I want with the lure. Don't name it till you love it and then don't fade the gestures too quickly and if the dog ever has issues you help them out with the gesture. By the time the gesture is faded out that dog should be super quick and fluent on the command without thinking about it. You shouldn't even be thinking variable reward schedule until that dog is fluent on those commands and has them down perfect. If you rush that too quickly it all breaks down. The way ellis teaches those commands and the order of them is meant to do it in a way that stops forward movement. Mondioring tags you with penalties for this but IPO does not.
> 
> If you are training a puppy 15 minute sessions are entirely too long.


Nope, luring was fine. I just don't think I had advanced the command for a great enough number of repetitions for it to be down pat. That's my theory anyway. I've also read that this happens quite commonly for a period, until the dog adjusts to the new command that's been added. It's obvious that she notices a similarity between biomechanically related commands like down and sit - she'll never confuse a come and a down


I know you guys are going to disagree with me on this but I bypass hand gestures and condition straight from verbal commands. This is where I depart from what Ellis and other marker training people teach. I just find it tedious and pointless. Even if it does help bridge between luring and the actual verbal command, I figure I can spent all that time I would have otherwise spend on teaching the transition, on reinforcing the verbal command. Pavlov's dogs never had hand gestures.

My female is around 1 year now.

I've never had a problem with motivating my dog/s. I've had my shepherd accidently bite my shoulder one time, wanting to get at his tug. My shepherd bitch has an absolutely mental food drive. It's funny how different their drives are. I've been working on my release marker for her recently, she seems to be doing well.


----------



## Alwaysaworkingdog (Feb 27, 2013)

Merciel said:


> It depends on your puppy and it depends what you're doing with your 15 minutes, I think.
> 
> w/r/t repetitive drilling ("do X, get a cookie. do X again, get another cookie," etc.), I agree with you. _That_ can get very boring very fast, no matter the age of your dog. Being a 1:1 cookie dispenser and nothing else will engage only the most food-driven dogs for long... and this ain't a Labrador forum.
> 
> But I've been able to work with 8-week-old puppies for almost a full hour on end by varying our exercises, varying the payoffs, and building in play breaks (which are themselves tied back to foundational training for something or other).


I'd agree with the first part, it depends on what you're doing. My repetitive drilling isn't like that obviously. I use the highest value treats I can find, pieces of bratwurst or roast chicken, something like that - that they actually enjoy. Reward events are varied, as Ellis teaches in Advanced Concepts in Motivation. I move around with my dog, use my voice, vary treat load. Get her to sit on objects. Get her to sit under distraction. Occasionally I'll jackpot treats. etc. etc. < but I get the feeling that's what you were alluding to. Making the reward events exciting?

But see, there you go, if you can keep an 8 week old pup engaged for that long then there's no reason why it can't be done. I think, if it isn't broken, don't try to fix it. If it's worked for you then no matter what other people say, you have that.


----------



## Bequavious (Mar 9, 2013)

Alwaysaworkingdog said:


> *I have met a lot of people who have no idea how to train dogs, yet are more than willing to preach to you about what to do and what not to do*, not that I'm as educated as I could be, but you have psychotic people who still practice compulsion and then you have the positive-only nut-jobs, in fact that's gotten so bad that I no longer feel comfortable taking my dog to the vet with a prong on, for fear of harassment.


Amen to this lol!

Also, I get that you don't need hand signals for sport and that's probably why you're bypassing them, but I find them _super_ easy to train and useful in everyday life or situations where I need to work with my dog quietly. Plus they tend to impress people who've never trained a dog before lol!


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

IMO, Hand signals are easier for a dog to understand than verbal signals. 

David Winners


----------



## Karla (Dec 14, 2010)

> IMO, Hand signals are easier for a dog to understand than verbal signals.
> 
> David Winners


I agree.


----------

