# Am I cheating ?



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

I've been greatly inspired by some of the IPO videos I have seen as well as videos of forum members with their dogs who have this common bond developed with their dogs. My first 2 GSDs I never really dealt with developing this focus and attention which some have trained their dogs to execute...like second nature to the dog. These dogs are intently looking up at the handler's eyes...complete focus on the handler...it seems to me they could walk over hot coals together and the dog just pays attention to the handler. So, because of this forum helping me broaden my horizons, I really took a different approach with my current GSD..."eyes" "eyes" and more "eyes"...the dog has learned to give me her eyes but I used treats as the reward, probably too much. I then progressed to using a frisbee for this focus and her stare..works great...go through the drills, she executes..still I have a frisbee as bait...without the frisbee the stare is not as intense but yet she performs. I recently started using a tennis ball on short piece of poly rope which I make easily enough....yeah, I know...I heard they sell them all ready to go....Anyway, the tug tennis ball gig gets the same "eyes" and focus but always more when it is present versus without it. I'm not dangling it in front of her but have it held against my chest with my right arm. So, now I will hide the ball and rope in my right jacket pocket without her seeing me do it, I know she knows it there because she can scent it...but she responds as if it is held against my chest...which is good. However, what is the next step so I do not need any lure whatsoever but still get the same stare and focus ? I have heard some handlers put a ball under their armpit but do not know if that is typical? Anyway, I feel like I am still "cheating" to get the dog's full stare and focus.

By the way, when my dog is fixed on my eyes when we are moving and doing drills, their marching style gait is really accentuated and a thing of beauty.

I'm not entertaining any IPO competitions but am simply a backyard Schutzhund pretender.


SuperG


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

I don't look for eye contact. The one dog I did that with became dependent on it and I never could re-train him away from it. I think of the focus as mostly anticipation. He expects the ball to be there whether it is or not. In the beginning, its like a target to teach the head up position, but later I think its a matter of them orienting themselves to the position on your body that has gotten them the reward. 

Don't rush getting away from that target though, and personally, I never move with the toy anywhere on my right side, I worry about that anticipation causing him to wrap and crowd me.


----------



## misslesleedavis1 (Dec 5, 2013)

Watch "Malinois Training Lesson Twenty" on YouTube
Malinois Training Lesson Twenty: https://youtu.be/oP1kNAqgYdo



Staring you into presenting what he wants, ?? I really enjoy this guy's videos


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Thanks Steve....makes sense ..as always.

misslesleedavis1...appreciate the link...made me laugh at the beginning..." ...that dog wants what ya have...it wants the food, its wants ya to pet it...it wants to leave your side and go bite an agitator "...


SuperG


----------



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

SuperG said:


> However, what is the next step so I do not need any lure whatsoever but still get the same stare and focus?


Build it into daily life by making it a default behavior. My dogs use eye contact to "ask" me for things they want, usually with a sit thrown in for good measure. I started by cuing it when they were puppies, then I'd just wait for it, and now it's pretty much automatic. 

I want those things on cue as well so when I say "watch" I get immediate eye contact, but I also want my dogs' attention without having to nag them for it all the time. They know it works, so they offer it up.


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

Well, what I was taught is to reward randomly/intermittently rather than constantly. When you go on the training field w/out the reward at a trial (some people hand it off to someone at the edge of the field quietly) the dog keeps expecting it. "Well! It didn't happen there!! When? Maybe now? Maybe after the next turn?" 

Basically some of us never fade it completely. It's there, it shows up from time to time in a positive fashion. 

Some say to focus on the eyes, others say to have the dog focus on your face...


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG; if you look at it that way then the whole exercise is cheating. It looks like the dog is paying attention to you, that is because he is looking you in the eyes. Nothing else is more attentive then the dog looking to one in his (her) eyes. Right? Wrong. If you train the dog like this then him looking in your eyes has nothing to do with him being "attentive" to you. He is just looking at a "spot" which is a trick he learned which will give him reward. In the same way you could teach him to look at any other part of your body or at carrot on a stick. You think that you are teaching the dog to pay attention to you but instead the dog - the master manipulator ( which they all are) is conning you so that he can get his toy. Thus the look you into your eyes has nothing to do with being attentive to you as a human being - entity with soul. 
This exercise is based on the theory that dog wants something I have thus I give it to him if he gives me what I want. It looks great, but all the dog wants is to please himself and you do not matter to him that much except as a pez dispenser. You all have seen video of a pup sniffing to a trainers hand for tasty treat and heeling in an amazing way.
But all that has nothing to do with the handler the handler could be anybody even a mechanical robot like here. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00DLuw6s8YE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF08zZddPUs
This training is designed for enhancement of precision and not that much for an enhancement of a relationship which you have with your dog. 
JMO


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I always want my dog to be aware of the surroundings and not just focus on my face or eyes. But that is points lost in sport. 
I think a GSD(which is not a Malinois!!) should always be on guard, alert to the world and the handler is just a part of the world....handler is of course most important, but I've seen dogs in training,tracking or even protection, that are so tunnel visioned on a reward, or the track, they have no clue what may be going on around them. Of course, balanced in the awareness, and not overly suspicious or low threshold in the 'on guard' character, but at least aware of the world around them. 
Love the scenarios where you have to call the dog off a bite to get another 'threat' before the threat can reach the handler. 
Multi-tasking is a great asset.


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

onyx'girl said:


> I always want my dog to be aware of the surroundings and not just focus on my face or eyes. But that is points lost in sport.
> I think a GSD(which is not a Malinois!!) should always be on guard, alert to the world and the handler is just a part of the world....handler is of course most important, but I've seen dogs in training, tracking that are so tunnel visioned on a reward, or the track, they have no clue what may be going on around them. Of course, balanced in the awareness, and not overly suspicious or low threshold in the 'on guard' character, but at least aware of the world around them.


I don't think its necessary to allow a dog who isn't being used for legitimate personal protection to be queuing on generally non threatening surroundings, and I wouldn't call a dog with well trained focus a 'Malinois' just because its focused. I don't need a dog to be suspicious of whats going on around them because I'm not (and neither is the great majority of the dog population) using a dog for real life protection purposes. 

My dog has drive for days, but that doesn't mean she's jumping off a cliff after a ball. I have met very few dogs who I actually think would, and theres quite a few people on this forum who seem to make it out like any dog with drive can't even think. I've had enough traveling and personal experience with plenty of dogs to know at this point how untrue that really is.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

GatorDog said:


> I don't think its necessary to allow a dog who isn't being used for legitimate personal protection to be queuing on generally non threatening surroundings, and I wouldn't call a dog with well trained focus a 'Malinois' just because its focused. I don't need a dog to be suspicious of whats going on around them because I'm not (and neither is the great majority of the dog population) using a dog for real life protection purposes.
> 
> My dog has drive for days, but that doesn't mean she's jumping off a cliff after a ball. I have met very few dogs who I actually think would, and theres quite a few people on this forum who seem to make it out like any dog with drive can't even think. I've had enough traveling and personal experience with plenty of dogs to know at this point how untrue that really is.


Nothing in my post suggested a dog isn't thinking when it is in drive or jumping off a cliff for a ball. I was posting about the Mal comparison, and what I see of the breed, they are very cued in on their handler, needy to the communication and aren't independently in their thinking as a GSD tends to be.
I did post that the dog should be balanced in the awareness and not overly suspicious, no? My opinion is just that, your opinion is yours.
Drive doesn't equal stupid, my dog has drive, but has balanced drive and still can multi-task, that was the gist of my post.
Thank you for sharing your traveling and training experience, point taken. I don't rack up enough miles, I guess.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Okay...it's starting to get above my pay grade now....but this is the kind of "stuff" I love to hear..because most of it is ...well...is at a higher level than I have achieved with my dogs over the years. In my defense, I guess I never really cared about this level of higher obedience and developing the skills and drives in a dog...there's my excuse...but I hate excuses...so now that I have been enlightened to what a dog is capable of...I am more than ever driven to take my dog with me to this next level.

So, Prager ....I get the mentality of the process...however I might disagree with your premise " _But all that has nothing to do with the handler the handler could be anybody even a mechanical robot like here_ " simply based on the fact that a mechanical robot is consistent whereas a human most likely cannot be that precise strictly with absolutely no "personality"...but as you state ....still a Pez dispenser. Personally, I think a robot and it's accuracy for a given task..is better than a human could be...in the particular situation represented. 

Here's my deal...my biggest goal is to develop this attention on me from my dog to win the day with her lacking in "civility " around other leashed dogs in close proximity. I want to go everywhere possible with this dog. And when I see what some of you have done with your dogs, I see my day recognized. So, if my dog sees me as a Pez dispenser or whatever and focuses on me enough and gets used to it as it learns I guide her brightly....I don't care what it takes...excepting ever breaking her spirit. It seems the more I work with this bitch the more she enjoys life and in turn so do I....it's been an education....and for this I thank you all for the feedback.


SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Okay...it's starting to get above my pay grade now....but this is the kind of "stuff" I love to hear..because most of it is ...well...is at a higher level than I have achieved with my dogs over the years. In my defense, I guess I never really cared about this level of higher obedience and developing the skills and drives in a dog...there's my excuse...but I hate excuses...so now that I have been enlightened to what a dog is capable of...I am more than ever driven to take my dog with me to this next level.
> 
> So, Prager ....I get the mentality of the process...however I might disagree with your premise " _But all that has nothing to do with the handler the handler could be anybody even a mechanical robot like here_ " simply based on the fact that a mechanical robot is consistent whereas a human most likely cannot be that precise strictly with absolutely no "personality"...but as you state ....still a Pez dispenser. Personally, I think a robot and it's accuracy for a given task..is better than a human could be...in the particular situation represented.
> 
> ...


 As far as robot training video I posted it because I wanted to exemplify that the dog in that type of training does not need human ( meaning you) - thus that is a proof to me that he is really not working for the human but he works for himself.
But I am saying this . Teach the dog to work for  you and not for the reward. Reward is good but in my opinion it should not be a purpose of the dog's response to a command. Today world is so supersaturated by training where the reward is the purpose of the dog's response that most trainers forgot that the dogs are here for us and we are their partners and they are ours, in work and fun and life and in war and peace. They are not just tools in our tool box. To me they are much more then that. Every day life with a dog is type of the "work" regardless of the type of the actual work they perform for us. Do not train the dogs for performance others to see and judges to judge. Train the dog to work because he loves you and because you said so and because it is his duty and service to you and you love him and have fun together . Do not let him work for him self for the purpose of getting reward from Pez dispenser. That cheapens the relationship you have with your dog. 
*In my book the reward is a consequence of the correct response to your command and not a purpose of the response.*


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

As far as robot training video I posted it because I wanted to exemplify that the dog in that type of training does not need human- thus that is a proof to me that he is really not working for the human but he works only to please himself and that is not relationship building training but performance building training. it is your choice. You struck me like a person more interested in relationship then in precise performance. Also if the dog works for you then the dog will be more reliable because if he works for reward and he encounters scenario where he does not care for such reward because stronger stimulus is present - like rabbit takes of in front of the dog - then your toy is just a irrelevant joke to him. Where if the dog works for you and is trained correctly then you will have less of such problem.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager said:


> As far as robot training video I posted it because I wanted to exemplify that the dog in that type of training does not need human- thus that is a proof to me that he is really not working for the human but he works only to please himself and that is not relationship building training but performance building training. it is your choice. You struck me like a person more interested in relationship then in precise performance. Also if the dog works for you then the dog will be more reliable because if he works for reward and he encounters scenario where he does not care for such reward because stronger stimulus is present - like rabbit takes of in front of the dog - then your toy is just a irrelevant joke to him. Where if the dog works for you and is trained correctly then you will have less of such problem.



Everything you said is spot on....my goal is a coexistence which both dog and I behave in each others best interests....it seems to be a hefty expectation but I believe it can be done. In essence, I want to be the highest value "reward" ...more than a piece of beef, frisbee, tug ball and most importantly a viable option which makes me more desirable than her yielding to her fears/aggression/reactivity. I use these simple tools as a method to get her to rely on me to bring them to her doorstep. However, in my grand scheme...after reading Lou Castle's "crittering" protocol...something made great sense to me...I might interpret this incorrectly but the idea that one can slowly yet surely guide a dog through it's "phobias" ...in my case leash reactivity to other dogs...most likely fear based..and doing this enough times with the dog learning to ignore the trigger via correction or enhanced focus ...or a combination of both..I will have my way...as will the dog. Yes, I am as you say...more interested in a relationship but to a great degree it is somewhat hinged on performance/obedience as well. I can see how the obedience of my dog will be the solution to her innate behavioral tendencies which restricts our goal of achieving the best possible relationship, in those specific terms....Don't know if that makes any sense to you...but it does to me....and that's all that matters ..right 


SuperG


----------



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

SuperG said:


> I can see how the obedience of my dog will be the solution to her innate behavioral tendencies which restricts our goal of achieving the best possible relationship, in those specific terms...


That's an interesting perspective. Why do you believe these goals (obedience and relationship) are mutually exclusive?


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> That's an interesting perspective. Why do you believe these goals (obedience and relationship) are mutually exclusive?


Excellent point...perhaps I said that to address Prager's premise regarding the two methods as cited. However, if I read Prager properly and you as well....I truly believe my dog flourishes when she knows she is pleasing me...but here's the rub...the dog at one point or another has to be "steered" in a particular direction...which once accomplished the dog learns it's the best way to go...and not just for me.

Do you somewhat believe enhanced obedience properly directed at a dog's weaknesses might overall improve the relationship?


SuperG


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Super G, FWIW in my experience the answer to your question above is a resounding yes.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Super G, FWIW in my experience the answer to your question above is a resounding yes.


Okay....great!....that's one vote of affirmation regarding my quest. Thanks !

Now, what's your (or anyone else) opinion/observations/experiences regarding this question...and I have a million of them. Prager posted " _Train the dog to work* because he loves you and because you said so and because it is his duty and service to you *and you love him and have fun together . Do not let him work for him self for the purpose of getting reward from Pez dispenser. That cheapens the relationship you have with your dog._" This seems to be a fine line of sorts but a definite distinction as well ( if that's possible). However, most importantly....there must be a bridge of sorts to convert the trained skills ( originally taught via a Pez dispenser routine ) to where the behavior becomes second nature to the dog, as human and dog work as a team. I find it highly difficult to distinguish between the difference of rewarding a dog initially for it's behavior via a Pez dispenser or being rewarded via because it's their duty/service/love. The dog has to be steered to understand the desired behavior and just because one has a wonderful connection with their dog...they must be educated to perform in a particular fashion in the beginning...and most always an inducement and/or correction is required. I am assuming one can be a " Pez dispenser" regardless of the reward as I don't use food rewards nearly as often...I indulge her other drives as rewards.

The words in bold in the quote seem to be a contradiction of sorts..."love" because I "said so".."duty" etc. 

I'm probably old school compared to Prager in my mentality that command and control of a dog is an essential ingredient of having the best connection possible with a dog...I believe a dog thrives on consistent quality leadership exhibited by the human....as it creates a balanced team.


SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

@Super G:
I remember to hike in the mountains if Vihorlat in Slovakia almost 50 years ago. It was a really primitive area - villages w no indoor plumbing, small livestock like goats and chicken living in the same quarters as people and when locals asked us what are we doing they could not comprehend what is the purpose of the "hiking ". Yet I watched and even stay with sheepherders and their flock and their dogs for few days and I have to tell you that I have never seen better trained and obedient dog as far as reliability goes and I assure
you that the dogs have never seen e collar or tug toy reward. Yet the dogs were just eager to work for his master and responded to a command on a dime and eagerly performed the task of herding and they came back to the sheepherder and plumped next to his foot tired, panting with no expectation of any reward - their reward was satisfaction of their master and his presence and common life with him - They were a team. 
Also obedience training is a new invention. For thousands of generations the dogs were trained by being with their master in every day life where the dog was a partner of his master and worked for him in the most natural way and when the owner was happy he praised the dog and when he was not happy he corrected him or punished him. And that is how the dog learned to be in tune with his master. 
In our over structured and over civilized world where computers robbed us of natural common sense our relationship with our dogs are strained by different schools of dog training where the natural life with our dogs is disappearing from our life like sand between our fingers.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Okay....great!....that's one vote of affirmation regarding my quest. Thanks !
> 
> Now, what's your (or anyone else) opinion/observations/experiences regarding this question...and I have a million of them. Prager posted " _Train the dog to work* because he loves you and because you said so and because it is his duty and service to you *and you love him and have fun together . Do not let him work for him self for the purpose of getting reward from Pez dispenser. That cheapens the relationship you have with your dog._" This seems to be a fine line of sorts but a definite distinction as well ( if that's possible). However, most importantly....there must be a bridge of sorts to convert the trained skills ( originally taught via a Pez dispenser routine ) to where the behavior becomes second nature to the dog, as human and dog work as a team. I find it highly difficult to distinguish between the difference of rewarding a dog initially for it's behavior via a Pez dispenser or being rewarded via because it's their duty/service/love. The dog has to be steered to understand the desired behavior and just because one has a wonderful connection with their dog...they must be educated to perform in a particular fashion in the beginning...and most always an inducement and/or correction is required. I am assuming one can be a " Pez dispenser" regardless of the reward as I don't use food rewards nearly as often...I indulge her other drives as rewards.
> 
> ...


 Being a "Pez dispenser" means that such training is not related to personal relationship between you and the dog -as the video of a training robot demonstrates. I am not against rewards though!!!. But rewards come in many forms,... one being that you show to the dog that you are happy and pleased and pet him and on the other hand correction which tells the dog that you are not happy. In another words you are the measure of all thinks to the dog and not just his desire to chase a toy. Yes it is a fine line but it is a tremendously important.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager said:


> @Super G:
> I remember to hike in the mountains if Vihorlat in Slovakia almost 50 years ago. It was a really primitive area - villages w no indoor plumbing, small livestock like goats and chicken living in the same quarters as people and when locals asked us what are we doing they could not comprehend what is the purpose of the "hiking ". Yet I watched and even stay with sheepherders and their flock and their dogs for few days and I have to tell you that I have never seen better trained and obedient dog as far as reliability goes and I assure
> you that the dogs have never seen e collar or tug toy reward. Yet the dogs were just eager to work for his master and responded to a command on a dime and eagerly performed the task of herding and they came back to the sheepherder and plumped next to his foot tired, panting with no expectation of any reward - their reward was satisfaction of their master and his presence and common life with him - They were a team.
> Also obedience training is a new invention. For thousands of generations the dogs were trained by being with their master in every day life where the dog was a partner of his master and worked for him in the most natural way and when the owner was happy he praised the dog and when he was not happy he corrected him or punished him. And that is how the dog learned to be in tune with his master.
> In our over structured and over civilized world where computers robbed us of natural common sense our relationship with our dogs are strained by different schools of dog training where the natural life with our dogs is disappearing from our life like sand between our fingers.


Great post...actually getting to see a shepherd in that type of realm..actually working for real and doing what it most likely really wanted to do. Yes, the synergy between dogs and sheepherders as you witnessed it is a team mentality of which I seek...but obviously adapted to today's situations. I somewhat have to believe that many of these IPO dogs and other performance dogs as well as simple companion dogs like mine can find this level of "service" and satisfaction in many forms...pleasing it's master can come in many forms I suppose. And I do appreciate that there needs to be the reciprocation of the master..well above and beyond a piece of food treat.

SuperG


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

IMHO. Reward can be a lot of things like release of pressure. When training horses you don't give food rewards, especially not when in saddle or in quick repetition on the ground. Yet horses are trained to perform in many different venues.

Bailiff often discusses the 4 quadrants of operant conditioning. One type of reward is release from unpleasant stimulation. I cannot remember which quadrant that is.....at the moment. 

Having said that the positive aspect of being a 'pez dispenser' temporarily is you can greatly increase the rate of positive reward while creating a marker. In my case I use the word good. When the dog associates the word good with reward you can wean off the treats.

I like being a 'pez dispenser' at first. Part of building a relationship with a dog is building a positive association between dog and trainer/handler and helping the dog feel successful. 

Example: 

I track with Ilda. At first I was having to use a lot of bait in the footsteps. Now that I've helped her succeed in tracking, I've greatly reduced the bait (food reward btw) and she still tracks with gusto and joy. The food helped her learn, get the hang of it, make the association of the the scent of the footstep, disturbed earth and vegetation, as 'a good thing'. Then the next step was feeling successful in her track. Once she was succeeding at turns and older aged tracks she grew in her confidence. Now the joy of it has overtaken her desire for bait. 

It's true that some dogs have such drive to work that maybe you can skip using food rewards. Some of this is genetic too, I've learned over the last few years.

So food as a way to set dogs up to succeed, to encourage positive associations thereby create a better relationship with you, what it is wrong with that? If a dog has good food drive, why not use it. 

Done properly you wean off food and things like a prong collar too. In other words, done properly, I don't see rewarding with treats as an absolute poisoning of the well. 




SuperG said:


> Okay....great!....that's one vote of affirmation regarding my quest. Thanks !
> 
> Now, what's your (or anyone else) opinion/observations/experiences regarding this question...and I have a million of them. Prager posted " _Train the dog to work* because he loves you and because you said so and because it is his duty and service to you *and you love him and have fun together . Do not let him work for him self for the purpose of getting reward from Pez dispenser. That cheapens the relationship you have with your dog._" This seems to be a fine line of sorts but a definite distinction as well ( if that's possible). However, most importantly....there must be a bridge of sorts to convert the trained skills ( originally taught via a Pez dispenser routine ) to where the behavior becomes second nature to the dog, as human and dog work as a team. I find it highly difficult to distinguish between the difference of rewarding a dog initially for it's behavior via a Pez dispenser or being rewarded via because it's their duty/service/love. The dog has to be steered to understand the desired behavior and just because one has a wonderful connection with their dog...they must be educated to perform in a particular fashion in the beginning...and most always an inducement and/or correction is required. I am assuming one can be a " Pez dispenser" regardless of the reward as I don't use food rewards nearly as often...I indulge her other drives as rewards.
> 
> ...


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> So food as a way to set dogs up to succeed, to encourage positive associations thereby create a better relationship with you, what it is wrong with that? If a dog has good food drive, why not use it.
> 
> .


I used to mountain climb and my teacher told me about vegetation on the mountain:" You can use it - just do not rely on it. " Same way I am not against using treats - I use them myself nor I am denying that conditioning works . 
But keep in mind .
When you train dog obedience there are 2 targets. To teach the dog to obey commands and most importantly to build relationship with your dog. Many trainers omit the second part since the dog is performing the commands if you use the first approach. But I do not want to be ever a "pez dispenser" to the dog since I do not want to have relationship with the dog that of a robot in the video.
When I train the dog I see it 2 ways.
Is the dog working:
- because he wants the the reward ( what ever it is) 
- or is he working because he got command and if he performs as told he will get reward. 
It seems to be the same but there is a big difference between those 2 approaches in an outcome in relationship. 
In the first case the dog works for reward thus for itself the handler does not matter unless he provides rewards and in the second case the dog works for the handler and reward is all it is - reward and not a purpose.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Super G

I forgot to mention, when building a truly close bond, relationship with a dog, or horse, or cat any domestic animal what is paramount (IMO) is trust. Are you being fair to this intelligent sentient creature before you. Dogs understand fairness. There was actually some behavioral studies recently proving this out. 

Without trust there is no real relationship. All relationships are a process of learning as well. 

@prager only - Not sure what you're getting at then? We are saying basically the same thing. There is no one "right" way. Anyone who espouses that will run smack into my wall of logic and get frustrated with me. LLAP. :sun: Happy Easter!


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager said:


> I used to mountain climb and my teacher told me about vegetation on the mountain:" You can use it - just do not rely on it. " Same way I am not against using treats - I use them myself nor I am denying that conditioning works .
> But keep in mind .
> When you train dog obedience there are 2 targets. To teach the dog to obey commands and most importantly to build relationship with your dog. Many trainers omit the second part since the dog is performing the commands if you use the first approach. But I do not want to be ever a "pez dispenser" to the dog since I do not want to have relationship with the dog that of a robot in the video.
> When I train the dog I see it 2 ways.
> ...



I am making an assumption for some others who responded ( along with many others who didn't ) but will assume a quality relationship has already been built and is continually developing as the dog learns it's way. The robot video is of little consequence to me except that it shows the precision and unfailing consistency of which many dog owners could not replicate flawlessly and in their inability to reproduce this consistency actually becomes a stumbling block in the dog's learning process.....so the robot has some merit to it as an example in this specific regard. 

I am curious.....what techniques do you employ with dogs which transforms a reward to have this specific subtle difference of which you profess? Do you not start out with a reward of petty significance when compared to the ultimate goal of a heightened understanding/relationship ?


SuperG


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Super G
> 
> I forgot to mention, when building a truly close bond, relationship with a dog, or horse, or cat any domestic animal what is paramount (IMO) is trust. Are you being fair to this intelligent sentient creature before you. Dogs understand fairness. There was actually some behavioral studies recently proving this out.
> 
> ...


Yes, trust and fairness....huge in my opinion. I have always professed in here when discipline might be the topic, that it need be evenhanded, fair and consistent. Because I have learned much from my previous 3 dogs via my mistakes, my current girl has been the beneficiary of this. In my opinion, if I am doing things properly, the dog needs to rely on me being 100% consistent in both my trust and fairness....wishy washy, emotional, etc does not win the day with a dog.....we all saw a prime example of that recently.

And a Happy Easter to you 


SuperG


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Hey Prager, putting aside the videos of the guy using props to teach positions and stuff, what handling did you do with dogs? Didn't you work in some kind of search and rescue?


----------



## Sabis mom (Mar 20, 2014)

SuperG said:


> Yes, trust and fairness....huge in my opinion. I have always professed in here when discipline might be the topic, that it need be evenhanded, fair and consistent. Because I have learned much from my previous 3 dogs via my mistakes, my current girl has been the beneficiary of this. In my opinion, if I am doing things properly, the dog needs to rely on me being 100% consistent in both my trust and fairness....wishy washy, emotional, etc does not win the day with a dog.....we all saw a prime example of that recently.
> 
> And a Happy Easter to you
> 
> ...


 I have used every...single...thing I have ever learned about dogs to deal with Shadow. But firm, fair, consistent is always my basis. Beyond that, honor the individual dog, use their own quirks and strengths to achieve goals. Shadow is nuts about praise and toys. I walk around with a squeaky toy under my arm.
Since your goal is a well behaved companion, not a trophy how could you possibly be cheating?

Happy Easter.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

In my years of working with animals from farm animals to companions like cats and dogs I've found it's an experiential process we go through. I can say be fair to your dog all day long but how is one actually fair in practice? 

It takes time, learning, learning and learning some more and a huge bucket load of humility too.

When I was leaning to ride horses my k stricter would change up the horses I rode on a regular basis. The more horses I learned to ride the better I understood them, learned to read their personalities and adapt to the different horses. 

I'm now embarking on that path slowly but surely with dogs. My dog trainer said a good way to do this with dogs is to pull shelter dogs. Train them to be great companions and then help them get into a good forever home and pull another dog. Of course one should do this under the mentoring of an experienced trainer and rehome the dogs carefully (not for a ton of money either). That idea appeals to me and I hope I can put it into practice later this year. I would do this only to increase my understanding and skills and because it would be a positive thing to help some shelter dogs too. 

In bold, roger that.  A sad reminder but really a reminder non the less on how important being fair is.....



SuperG said:


> Yes, trust and fairness....huge in my opinion. I have always professed in here when discipline might be the topic, that it need be evenhanded, fair and consistent. Because I have learned much from my previous 3 dogs via my mistakes, my current girl has been the beneficiary of this. In my opinion, if I am doing things properly, the dog needs to rely on me being 100% consistent in both my trust and fairness....wishy washy, emotional, etc does not win the day with a dog...*..we all saw a prime example of that recently.*
> 
> And a Happy Easter to you
> 
> ...


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

iPads. Sigh. "K stricter" should read "instructor".


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Sabis mom said:


> Since your goal is a well behaved companion, not a trophy how could you possibly be cheating?
> 
> Happy Easter.



LOLOL....I like that answer....I guess I have seen enough wonderful examples of dogs which seem so incredibly in tune with their owners/handlers. ..many fine examples in this forum. Whether it is IPO, conformation, obedience, agility, therapy and other service dogs, I believe ( and hopefully someone will correct me if I am wrong ) all of these people can have their dogs by their side regardless of the venue and maintaining wonderful behavior. And of course many a companion dog as well, since most are all companions.

I think my rationale for asking " Am I Cheating" is my goal for dog and I to be able to go anywhere and everywhere together which is allowable. Our "Achilles' heel" seems to be her behavior while on leash around other and especially dogs which she is not familiar with... I have made significant improvements via some forum members' advice by increasing obedience as well as developing focus through engagement and proceeding at a level which always keeps the dog below threshold. I have expressed my impatience at times but only temporarily as I will not quit or give up on this journey we are on together....and it IS making a difference. So, this fading of the "reward" is important to me for this very specific reason. I am starting to see that as focus and obedience increase, I am able to walk my dog through her fear based quirks with more confidence on her behalf. I am under the impression that the more times I subject the dog to her fears but still have command and control as she looks to me for leadership/calm/confidence and she handles the event within tolerance, she will eventually figure out one of two things..1.) there is nothing to fear due to successful repeated exposures 2.) there is a better way for her to expend her energy and focus...that would be on me.. and I suppose a third possibility of a combination of both.

Sabis, if I am not mistaken, you have had SAR dogs and I'm guessing those dogs did go everywhere with you regardless of what elements existed.

FWIW, if I go the rest of this dog's future or my own, working on this snag with the dog, making improvements slowly but surely...I'm fine with that. For what she lacks in nerve at times is of no bother to me, she's my dog...and that's all that matters...

And a Happy Easter to you as well,

SuperG


----------



## Sabis mom (Mar 20, 2014)

No SAR dogs, PPD/patrol dogs. My plans for Miss Muffit, AKA Shadow were SAR or detection since she is all about the nose. 
But she's happy being my little fairy dog and trying to fly, lol. Most at ease in her own happy world, who am I to judge? She is a sweet and gentle spirit that would be injured by repeated and prolonged exposure to 'our' hostile and toxic world.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prader,

Okay...now you have me totally confused....I was reading the thread " *Czech/work line*" and saw your post....


_If you want Working line GSD then you will need to work it. All dogs
need training and working dogs bred to work will need it too and more.
Meaning you need to train it's basic social skills and +/- (!!!)obedience . Train the dog mostly during every day life. Yes vs No. Use +/- obedience and not competition type + only motivational obedience. that is my advise. If you do that then you can not get better dog then Old style Czech lines working dogs for your family. After all the GSD is a working dog and not a show dog or sport dog . As far as having such dog for family MHO is that there is not more noble work for the GSD then to be a family dog social dog and at the same time protector. But you ave to help him to get there. 
*Also remember what culture GSD came from - German culture which imprinted itself on this breed. Germans are great engineers and people which like uncompromising order and structure and discipline . Thus if you treat the dog such way then you will succeed.* If you tend to repeat commands and let the dog get away with "stuff" then Czech working line is not necessarily the best choice for you. 
Also remember that there are big differences among Czech lines. 
The Old Style Czech GSD (OSCZD as I call them ) is one type and the modern WG like sport dog and WGSL is another. The OSCZD is in my book the epitome of working GSD and I have imported the first ones in US and elsewhere and I do not think that there is better type of GSD for almost any work GSD can do. Some say that I am bias. Well duuuh. I always like the best. So yes I am bias. 
Look if you want to have a dog of any kind you will have to train it. Czech dogs learn fast and are very intelligent which maybe good if they are part of your family and not so good if you neglect them intentionally or unintentionally. 
Someone said that they are slowly maturing . It may look like it but the reason for such opinion is that way because OSCZD are not strictly or mostly prey driven like sport dogs are but they are of balanced dives between prey and defense . Prey driven dogs display the prey early in life and thus training bitework through prey will make dog bite sooner and thus look like it matured sooner. Where the dog who is 50:50 prey : defense/natural protectiveness or even more toward natural protectiveness will take little more time to mature to use protectiveness for their bitework. In another words the dog must be first more mature to actually protect rather then just to chase things in prey. Thus the opinion that OSCZD mature slowly....which may seems like it but is not exactly so. _
_ Last edited by Prager; 04-03-2015 at 07:44 PM.

_Okay, now you are really confusing me.....in this thread " Am I cheating?" you seemed to place quite an emphasis on " _Train the dog to work because he* loves you* and because you said so and because it is his duty and service to you and* you love him* and *have fun *together . Do not let him work for him self for the purpose of getting reward from Pez dispenser. That* cheapens the relationship *you have with your dog."_ 

And in the post pasted above you state "_*Germans are great engineers and people which like uncompromising order and structure and discipline . Thus if you treat the dog such way then you will succeed.*_"

I have to ask you...where's all the "love", "fun" and "relationship" in that response ?????

Do you use different techniques based on the title of the thread or just wing it ? 


SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Super G
> 
> I forgot to mention, when building a truly close bond, relationship with a dog, or horse, or cat any domestic animal what is paramount (IMO) is trust. Are you being fair to this intelligent sentient creature before you. Dogs understand fairness. There was actually some behavioral studies recently proving this out.
> 
> ...


 Just do not forget that dogs have different fair then humans.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Steve Strom said:


> Hey Prager, putting aside the videos of the guy using props to teach positions and stuff, what handling did you do with dogs? Didn't you work in some kind of search and rescue?


What handling did I do with dogs? I am not sure I understand , but I try to answer. . Yes I worked S&R and millions of other training I train PP, LE, PSA, SchH and my passion is behavioral modification and make people understand the relationships we could have with our dogs if people open eyes and see other training approaches besides you want this so I'll give it to you if you do that which is prevalent and PC and generally accepted approach which aims towards precision of performance but towards our proper relationship with our dogs.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> In my years of working with animals from farm animals to companions like cats and dogs I've found it's an experiential process we go through. I can say be fair to your dog all day long but how is one actually fair in practice?
> 
> It takes time, learning, learning and learning some more and a huge bucket load of humility too.
> 
> ...


That is excellent way to learn to train dogs. Also you can get internship with a trainer you like. The first step is to figure out what you like meaning what training approach.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Prader,
> 
> Okay...now you have me totally confused....I was reading the thread " *Czech/work line*" and saw your post....
> 
> ...


Wow slow down pardner. What's up with the hostility?Let me ask you some questions which come to my mind after I read your post. You actually see a contradiction between those two statements? So you do not think that there is love possible between you and the dog if you insist on him to respond to you on first command in any situation and behave properly in any social setting? You do not think that we should be fair to the dogs and give them structure of always treating them the same way in same situations and for the same responses?
Do you think that it is loving to let the dog get away with " stuff"? Do you think that Germans are not capable of loving their dogs? - And believe me there is not love lost between me and Germans but I do respect tremendously the way they breed and treat their dogs. .


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

I have a trainer I work with already, he would be coaching me. 

I can't do an internship, I'm 51 and have a full time job to pay the bills already. I have enough "bosses" in my life as it is. 

This would not be for a career move at this point, it would be for personal enrichment and learning experience with dogs. 




Prager said:


> That is excellent way to learn to train dogs. Also you can get internship with a trainer you like. The first step is to figure out what you like meaning what training approach.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Prager said:


> What handling did I do with dogs? I am not sure I understand , but I try to answer. . Yes I worked S&R and millions of other training I train PP, LE, PSA, SchH and my passion is behavioral modification and make people understand the relationships we could have with our dogs if people open eyes and see other training approaches besides you want this so I'll give it to you if you do that which is prevalent and PC and generally accepted approach which aims towards precision of performance but towards our proper relationship with our dogs.


Prevalent and PC? I just have one simple point, in every venue you mentioned and in SAR too, the dogs work for rewards. That's how things are sustained. Whether its hunting for a lost person or focus heeling for 15mins. They don't do it for love. The actual relationship or bond or whatever comes from a lot of pieces, but the behavior created for a reward is all basically the same, pez dispenser or the lazy, follow me type heeling some want to claim is "real"


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Praeger,

Your sense is off regarding hostility....if you had sensed frustration...you'd have been correct.

Your words " _*Germans are great engineers and people which like uncompromising order and structure and discipline . Thus if you treat the dog such way then you will succeed." *_sounds like a wonderful description of the feeding robot AKA "Pez dispenser". Tis be the point I was trying to make. 

I like the way Steve Strom expressed it..." _The actual relationship or bond or whatever comes from a lot of pieces,_"...this makes sense to me.

As much as I "love" my dog...I am not so sure she will change her behavior with regards to her particular behavior regarding her leash aggression because of my "love" for her. I wish it was that simple.....

Whether I love my dog or not, I have to show my dog a better way to get her over her fear in this situation...so far, developing more obedience and focus seems to be the way to go as we are making progress. Let me put it this way, if I "loved" my dog as much as humanly possible, I rather doubt it will put a dent in this particular behavior. However, I have asked you for some examples of how to enhance this "love" and not heard any methods. 

As far as the dog physically focusing on me and your notion that it is but a cheap trick which the dog will be rewarded for...nothing more...nothing less. Here's a counter to that... I just got back from a bike ride with my dog, along the way we encountered a Corgi on a long lead tied to a fence post...the Corgi could make it to the curb effectively. My failing was I was caught by surprise as I was not vigilant enough to see this coming...so my dog starts to ramp up....I say "NO" she gets one second to obey and then she gets a snap on the prong to break her escalation...I stop the bike and start obedience right there in the middle of the street, I get her focus, she's giving me her attention not the Corgi...and we all know my dog is 110% aware of the Corgi's presence 15 feet away. I put her on a sit/wait for 20 seconds and not once does she break her stare at me, she seems to have regained her composure...so I do a U turn and take her back through the situation again and she succeeds without any antics....I feel a very small victory of sorts. It is important to note, I did not accomplish this with a food treat, toy or any other bait other than our increased obedience and focus....which WAS created earlier with all of the aforementioned rewards as a component of the heightened obedience and focus. When I go on bike rides and she comes, I do not bring any rewards of any type....it's not practical as I am too busy making sure I'm not bouncing my head off the pavement if my dog goes off on another dog in too close of quarters.

SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Steve Strom said:


> Prevalent and PC? I just have one simple point, in every venue you mentioned and in SAR too, the dogs work for rewards. That's how things are sustained. Whether its hunting for a lost person or focus heeling for 15mins. They don't do it for love. The actual relationship or bond or whatever comes from a lot of pieces, but the behavior created for a reward is all basically the same, pez dispenser or the lazy, follow me type heeling some want to claim is "real"


 Well not necessarily. And that is my point.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Praeger,
> 
> Your sense is off regarding hostility....if you had sensed frustration...you'd have been correct.
> 
> ...


 Well I do not know where it turned into dogs work only for love. I have nowhere insulated such notion. 

Well GOOD believe it or not you made the dog finally work for you. But you could have started that approach from get go. Look training has several stages: Learning where you are explaining the dog what the command means then there are conditioning stage, practicing stage and working stage. 
In learning stage you can train the dog with focus on reward of a toy or treat or what have you which is a pez training where you do not mean to the dog squat except provider of a reward just like the robot whose videos I posted. That type of approach does not enable you to establish leadership position over the dog - which forces the dog to assume leadership position and that is why your dogs decided that it needs to protect you - the weak part of the pack. Weak because you did not establish leadership position through training and THAT is EXACTLY why you have problem with what you call "the leash aggression". 
Or you could start the dog with +&- training which immediately from get go teaches the dog that you are the leader, that you do not need her protection unless you tall her that you do ( if she is trained for it), that you are in charge. If you would do that FROM GET GO instead train her performance training where the dog works for reward then we would not have this discussion since the dog would not misbehave the way you are describing and if it would then simple No wold give dog understanding what you want.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Steve Strom said:


> Prevalent and PC? I just have one simple point, in every venue you mentioned and in SAR too, the dogs work for rewards. That's how things are sustained. Whether its hunting for a lost person or focus heeling for 15mins. They don't do it for love. The actual relationship or bond or whatever comes from a lot of pieces, but the behavior created for a reward is all basically the same, pez dispenser or the lazy, follow me type heeling some want to claim is "real"


 No they do not do focus heeling for love of you and that is the problem which is so big that many do not even see it. 
BTW we are talking about * obedience and behavioral modification* here and not about other type of training like S&R. Nowhere have I said that you should not use motivational training, I use motivational training all the time. All I am saying that we should not rely on it 100% and forgetting other approaches. 
Remember when I said that when you climb the mountain you can use vegetation but not to rely on it?


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager said:


> Well I do not know where it turned into dogs work only for love. I have nowhere insulated such notion.
> 
> Well GOOD believe it or not you made the dog finally work for you. But you could have started that approach from get go. Look training has several stages: Learning where you are explaining the dog what the command means then there are conditioning stage, practicing stage and working stage.
> In learning stage you can train the dog with focus on reward of a toy or treat or what have you which is a pez training where you do not mean to the dog squat except provider of a reward just like the robot whose videos I posted. That type of approach does not enable you to establish leadership position over the dog - which forces the dog to assume leadership position and that is why your dogs decided that it needs to protect you - the weak part of the pack. Weak because you did not establish leadership position through training and THAT is EXACTLY why you have problem with what you call "the leash aggression".
> Or you could start the dog with +&- training which immediately from get go teaches the dog that you are the leader, that you do not need her protection unless you tall her that you do ( if she is trained for it), that you are in charge. If you would do that FROM GET GO instead train her performance training where the dog works for reward then we would not have this discussion since the dog would not misbehave the way you are describing and if it would then simple No wold give dog understanding what you want.


Interesting....appreciate your reply and insight. Now, I am questioning myself as to your thoughts regarding "_That type of approach does not enable you to establish leadership position over the dog - which forces the dog to assume leadership position and that is why your dogs decided that it needs to protect you - the weak part of the pack. Weak because you did not establish leadership position through training and THAT is EXACTLY why you have problem with what you call "the leash aggression". _I guess I thought I was in the leadership position but perhaps not, according to your opinion. So, in your estimation...if I am able to have command and control of the dog and the dog is obedient in all other situations without the use of any immediate or obvious pending rewards...whatever they may be...but the dog does not heed my words when we are in this "leash aggression" situation...which is the only time we have difficulty....it means I am viewed as a subordinate by her...correct ? If so, is the weaning off of all rewards and still maintaining command and control the ticket to beating the leash aggression? I just started a thread regarding this basic notion...http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/training-theory-methods/543874-training-question.html

I do find it hard to believe that my dog does not look to me as the leader in our pack BUT I am willing to investigate anything which will improve upon this lacking (leash reactivity). Which has greatly improved over time as I have increased her obedience and focus...but still not within tolerances for me...and obviously the dog.

One last question...my dog is well past the 'learning" stage you cited...she knows the proper behavior of all tasks we have accomplished via the "learning" stage. However, we take on new skills to add to her repertoire to keep her mind busy and always learning. So, besides learning new skills...is there ever a need for reward of any type excepting praise perhaps in one form or another?

SuperG


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Super G, do you have access to a trainer? I had similar problems with Ilda and while this board is really helpful I hate seeing you struggle on with this.

These sort of things are best dealt with one on one with a trainer that knows how to deal with aggression/GSDs. 

For all we know she could actually be feeling very insecure and telling the other dogs to back off because "she" is fearful of them. 

Do you have an IPO club near you that could recommend a trainer? Trust me, it is SO worth it and you will progress much faster and with less stress for you and your dog.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

SuperG said:


> Interesting....appreciate your reply and insight. Now, I am questioning myself as to your thoughts regarding "_That type of approach does not enable you to establish leadership position over the dog - which forces the dog to assume leadership position and that is why your dogs decided that it needs to protect you - the weak part of the pack. Weak because you did not establish leadership position through training and THAT is EXACTLY why you have problem with what you call "the leash aggression".
> 
> SuperG_


_

Ha, if that's all it was, your lack of "Leadership" Prager wouldn't need kennels. The man who needs no vegetation would simply wave his hand and all those original Czech border dogs would never consider eating each other._


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Prager said:


> No they do not do focus heeling for love of you and that is the problem which is so big that many do not even see it.
> BTW we are talking about * obedience and behavioral modification* here and not about other type of training like S&R. Nowhere have I said that you should not use motivational training, I use motivational training all the time. All I am saying that we should not rely on it 100% and forgetting other approaches.
> Remember when I said that when you climb the mountain you can use vegetation but not to rely on it?


I didn't forget any approaches. You don't seem to like certain applications of motivational training, so you want to just dismiss them, even though the basic premise is the same. The dog works for rewards. Focused heeling doesn't change the character of the dog.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Super G, do you have access to a trainer? I had similar problems with Ilda and while this board is really helpful I hate seeing you struggle on with this.
> 
> These sort of things are best dealt with one on one with a trainer that knows how to deal with aggression/GSDs.
> 
> ...


Thank you for this....

I have dealt with 2 different "professionals" one was an all positive DS and CC class...I saw a small amount of improvement but it seemed insufficient. I also tried a one on one "professional" trainer and it was aimed more at what I am presently doing but lacking in the development of focus and increased overall obedience. I have been convinced that it is exactly as you suggested " _For all we know she could actually be feeling very insecure and telling the other dogs to back off because "she" is fearful of them._" Granted this is contrary to Prager's thinking BUT...I see no harm in considering Prager's advice as I do not see any fallout from either reestablishing, enhancing or creating a leadership role via having the dog abide as the lures and rewards are removed. Not to be disrespectful to Prager but I think her quirk with the reactivity is as you say...as I have said before this dog could have more nerve but it is of no consequence because she is stuck with me for the entire distance....and I hope it is a marathon.

I really appreciate your not wanting me to have to struggle/stress ..as well as the dog...perhaps I have been too melodramatic...we have come a long way...believe me. And, I rather enjoy a challenge...I have the time and most certainly the desire and I am not a quitter. I have also investigated Lou Castle's crittering protocol and even though I haven't committed to that approach...I am using bits and pieces of it and made good gains. I also have used the greatly appreciated instruction of some in this forum via PM and from this, my dog and I are a better team than ever...there is a common thread to all of the advice I have chosen to use and it is working...maybe not as quick as I would like...but I have no excuses, only things to learn.

Your advice about contacting my local IPO club is something I haven't done and I feel the moron for not doing as such...so I will and I will see what they suggest and then proceed to do my due diligence.

My goal of taking her everywhere with me will be recognized...we are on our way....this journey so far actually has yielded benefits which I did not imagine...this I rather enjoy and so does my girl.

SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Interesting....appreciate your reply and insight. Now, I am questioning myself as to your thoughts regarding "_That type of approach does not enable you to establish leadership position over the dog - which forces the dog to assume leadership position and that is why your dogs decided that it needs to protect you - the weak part of the pack. Weak because you did not establish leadership position through training and THAT is EXACTLY why you have problem with what you call "the leash aggression". _I guess I thought I was in the leadership position but perhaps not, according to your opinion. So, in your estimation...if I am able to have command and control of the dog and the dog is obedient in all other situations without the use of any immediate or obvious pending rewards...whatever they may be...but the dog does not heed my words when we are in this "leash aggression" situation...which is the only time we have difficulty....it means I am viewed as a subordinate by her...correct ? If so, is the weaning off of all rewards and still maintaining command and control the ticket to beating the leash aggression? I just started a thread regarding this basic notion...http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/training-theory-methods/543874-training-question.html
> 
> I do find it hard to believe that my dog does not look to me as the leader in our pack BUT I am willing to investigate anything which will improve upon this lacking (leash reactivity). Which has greatly improved over time as I have increased her obedience and focus...but still not within tolerances for me...and obviously the dog.
> 
> ...


first of if you would be in leadership position then the dog would not be overly aggressive towards other dog in order to " protect you" and if it would turn aggressive since that is what dogs do, then you should be able to stop with her with only one word : "NO" or equivalent. That should be especially easy to do when she is on leash and not more difficult. 
As far as praising the dog you can and should praise it when ever the dog response. What is important however is; is she looking at the rewards as a primary motivator of it's response ( Pez) or is the reward as such seen as a result for job well done and the dog performs the command because you said so.
Example for sake of clarity: You see if someone/anyone else would command the dog where the dog is motivated by the reward, then the dog will tend to perform for anyone, that is since all he cares about is the reward and he works for itself. 
On the other hand where the dog is trained to perform because the handler says so, then such dog will not perform for any stranger until it bonds with him. That is one of the differences between dog working for reward and dog working for the handler. That is one difference between working for reward and and working for the handler.


----------



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

Prager said:


> Example for sake of clarity: You see if someone/anyone else would command the dog where the dog is motivated by the reward, then the dog will tend to perform for anyone, that is *since all he cares about is the reward and he works for itself*.


Yes, but your implication is that the dog is ONLY motivated by the reward, and that relationship is not a factor at all. I use a lot of motivational training starting from puppyhood, and I've never had an instance where that's been the case. Do you know of dogs like that? Because I've never encountered one that did not form an intense bond with me, no matter what type of training we've done together. It's never been me OR the reward, the reward comes through me - I am associated with the reward. I am the leader because I control the resources, all good things come from me.



> On the other hand where *the dog is trained to perform because the handler says so*, then such dog will not perform for any stranger until it bonds with him. That is one of the differences between dog working for reward and dog working for the handler.


Again, you're making a distinction that I don't believe exists. Dogs do not need to choose between working for the handler or for themselves. Dogs are opportunistic, they do what works. Whether that's a food reward, or play with their handler, or praise, or avoiding a punishment, whatever. 

Also, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "trained to perform because the handler says so". Maybe I lack imagination, but I can only think of rewarding the correct behavior or correcting the wrong behavior. Is there something I'm missing? If it's just correcting the wrong behavior, then can't anyone do that too, not just the handler?


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Super G if you're lucky, like I was, you'll get with a great trainer in a group OB class. Your progress will be by leaps and bounds and you and your dog will have fun and meet new like minded people. 

Having a trainer with a *good* back ground in IPO (or other bite sport) IME is big plus in the trainer resume. They tend to be better at reading dogs and usually use a full array of tools to help you and your dog.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager,

I took to heart what you suggested, slept on it and have come to the reasoning that your suggestion that I am the "weak part of the pack"...is so very incorrect....I gave your notion great thought and did it with my ego put aside. Yes, I know admitting to oneself that they are a subordinate to the dog is a tough pill to swallow hence I investigated your premise with a very open mind. I have all too many indicators to suggest otherwise...

A couple of thoughts....One, it is all often people come into this forum and describe how their once docile pup has now become reactive to other dogs and many of them say " I guess the dog is protecting me "...most always the common voice which replies to this assumption is " No, the dog is not protecting you, it very well could be exhibiting fear via aggressive posturing "....fight or flight and all that...limited maneuvering room via a leash and collar..etc. Your opinion is...a reactive dog in this situation is simply because the dog is protecting the weaker pack members..Now chances are you might rebut with..the dog's fear is predicated on weak leadership or none at all, perhaps that could happen in some instances but to generalize that all dogs which exhibit reactivity to other dogs while leashed is simply due to the human being a subordinate to the dog seems very far fetched. Many times a pup's development might include an event which started this reactive process in motion...could be the day the cute little puppy was brought to the dog park, encountered a group of older dogs and decided to take flight...pup is run down and rolled by the other dogs...or it could be a simple wiring of a dog with weaker nerves. 

I find it interesting that my dog off leash does not "protect" me as the weaker part of the pack when she is off leash around other dogs...Am I suddenly "pack leader" when the collar and leash are off? Granted my girl's "meet and greet" with other dogs off leash is a bit dominant as she lords herself over most other dogs...but when I recall her...she comes...no altercations.

However, in a roundabout way...some of what you have suggested makes sense...increased obedience without baiting the dog in this particular situation is of merit. Yes, in the beginning when she exhibited this behavior..I could have had a rib roast in her face when she went off on leash in the presence of a another dog...and as you say...it was worthless because her focus on the other dog was far more enticing...I learned this very quickly....so I didn't bother taking that route.


SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Steve Strom said:


> I didn't forget any approaches. You don't seem to like certain applications of motivational training, so you want to just dismiss them, even though the basic premise is the same. The dog works for rewards. Focused heeling doesn't change the character of the dog.


That maybe one premise but it is not THE only premise cast in stone. And I am not dismissing motivational training . That is incorrect take on what I am saying. I use motivational training all the time. However it is not the only approach. And to say that dog works for rewards is true but for what rewards? Toy. So what did people do when they trained dogs in old Rome . Called Ray Allen and ordered some motivational toys? Or what is the sheepherder training his dog do ? Does he use hot dogs or some chrome plated crap treats from petsmart? No. He used praising and petting and reward via positive and negative . He used timing of voice (praise and voice corrections )and pet on the head. No e collars no tricky training methods. 
Now do I use motivational approach for for example S&R training? Yes!!!! Of course - in S&R dogs are looking for a "victim" who is going to throw them a ball/stick/toy. But in process of training this I also use + & - to control the dog when instead searching for a person he or she decides to switch to track a deer instead. 
When I train a dog I am not using only one approach and walk around like a man with hammer in his hand who sees everything as being a nail.
I change the approaches depending what I want to achieve. Thus if I want to achieve leadership position - which is a cornerstone of the relationship I have with the dog - then I am not going to waste my opportunity to establish leadership position over the dog during training of specific obedience commands and use method where the dog works to reward it self by performing for a toy but I use negative reinforcement instead. ( And negative reinforcement is not correction - Just to make sure that we are on the same page.)


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Well, all that should help the vegetation grow.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Thank you for this....
> 
> I have dealt with 2 different "professionals" one was an all positive DS and CC class...I saw a small amount of improvement but it seemed insufficient. I also tried a one on one "professional" trainer and it was aimed more at what I am presently doing but lacking in the development of focus and increased overall obedience. I have been convinced that it is exactly as you suggested " _For all we know she could actually be feeling very insecure and telling the other dogs to back off because "she" is fearful of them._" Granted this is contrary to Prager's thinking BUT...I see no harm in considering Prager's advice as I do not see any fallout from either reestablishing, enhancing or creating a leadership role via having the dog abide as the lures and rewards are removed. Not to be disrespectful to Prager but I think her quirk with the reactivity is as you say...as I have said before this dog could have more nerve but it is of no consequence because she is stuck with me for the entire distance....and I hope it is a marathon.
> 
> ...


SuperG[/QUOTE]
As soon as the trainer or handler starts blaming the dog's misbehavior on weak nerves and insecurity,.. then I call that a cap out. trainers are here to solve the problem and not to blame the dog.
Any problem which we have with our dog is ALWAYS the handler/trainer /owner problem. Dumb animal on one end of the leash and the dog on the other. 
The fact is that training principles if sound, apply to to balanced dogs and to dogs with temperament problem as well or even more so. The only difference is the speed with which the sound dog will progress through the incremental steps of the training. Lets use your preposition that dog is insecure with other dogs around.
First let me say that any dog in some situations will see another dog in the area as a potential negative challenge. If I am in correct leadership position with my dog then regardless if the dog is secure or not 
s/he will look up to me he - her handler /owner/trainer for guidance. Then such dog will see me that I am not concerned with the strange dog and he too then be not concerned. 
If I am in leadership position with the dog and dog shows aggression towards another dog then mere NO from me sometimes - if necessary- accentuated with correction on the leash , should stop such aggression. I have trained thousands of dogs and if I have risen them from a pup such dogs were just about always dog neutral or if not mere NO! would change the dog's mind from aggression to neutral defusing of aggression. 
Now if I am not in leadership position the dog has no one to look to for guidance. Thus it is now up to the dog alone to decide what to do.He has to make the decision on his own thus s/he is trusted into leadership decision making position. 
The dog in stressful; situation has a choice between FIGHT or FLIGHT. When the dog is on the leash the flight option is limited. Thus instead of flight we usually have show of aggression or even full blown fight. 
* MAKING MATERS WORSE. *
Next time when such handler walks such dog and he see's a strange dog the handler, based on last similar experience, get's worried about what is his dog going to do. OMG moment. 
His dog picks on such worries but misread them and sees them as a fear of his master of the strange dog. Thus that then reinforces the dog's conviction that the handler is not in leadership position and again became protective/aggressive towards the strange dog. This one with more intensity then the former one. The strange dog may run away - and that confirms our dog's conviction that his/her action is valid since it worked and next time it will try to do it again. Or the strange dog will also turn aggressive and that convinces our dog to be even more aggressive. 
In mean time the handler worries more and more about strange dogs who are further and further away and the vicious spiral of aggression is getting more and more out of control. 
I would bet you $1000 that if I or other trainer takes the very same dog and spends with her little time from few minutes to 3 days to establish leadership position, then the dog will not show any aggression or it will be easily defused by "NO!" command. 
One of the problems with today training for every day life is that trainers do not teach correctly what "NO!" is and do not establish leadership position and instead worry about performance and precision training where the dog works for itself in order to get reward.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Yes, but your implication is that the dog is ONLY motivated by the reward, and that relationship is not a factor at all. I use a lot of motivational training starting from puppyhood, and I've never had an instance where that's been the case. Do you know of dogs like that? Because I've never encountered one that did not form an intense bond with me, no matter what type of training we've done together. It's never been me OR the reward, the reward comes through me - I am associated with the reward. I am the leader because I control the resources, all good things come from me.


 If you did not have instance like that that is because of you and not of the training methods you used.
Have Ii seen such dogs? Of course, I have, all the time . I sell dogs to LE and and LEOs have even term for it: " Will work from the box." The reason for that is that the dog is trained to work for the reward and not for the handler thus he does not care who "controls the resources" as you put it as long as the handler has the resources. You say: "I am associated with the reward." That does not make you a leader. Dog trained that way will associate anyone who holds the leash or who has a his toy in hand with the reward. I do not want the dog to listen to me just because "I am in control of resources he wants" Or because "I am associated with the reward." 
I want him to respond because I said so. And that is his primary motivation and it should not matter if I have a tug toy or treat on me. 
Have you ever seen or heard dogs which are competition wise? The reason for that is that such dog knows that he will not get rewarded during competition performance so he stops working. There are many ways to get around such problem which is beyond the scope of this post. But the reason for that is because the dog knows that the Pez dispenser does not work during competition. 





Cassidy's Mom said:


> Again, you're making a distinction that I don't believe exists. Dogs do not need to choose between working for the handler or for themselves. Dogs are opportunistic, they do what works. Whether that's a food reward, or play with their handler, or praise, or avoiding a punishment, whatever.
> 
> Also, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "trained to perform because the handler says so". Maybe I lack imagination, but I can only think of rewarding the correct behavior or correcting the wrong behavior. Is there something I'm missing? If it's just correcting the wrong behavior, then can't anyone do that too, not just the handler?


Yes dogs do work for what ever works for them Nowhere I am denying such truism. But so what? It is up to us to make them to work for the reason most beneficial to us. 

You say that you do not understand what it means when I say that dogs could be "trained to perform because the handler says so" and that is the problem with most training today. Even so I explained it here until I am blue around the gills some still " are not sure" what I am saying. I know my English has a lot to be desired but with all due respect it is not just my command of English language it is also like to try to tell to color blind man what green color is. No offense intended. We all often get so wrapped up in out way of thinking that we just can not see what the other person is saying. 
Have you ever seen the invisible gorilla test?
The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> Prager,
> 
> I took to heart what you suggested, slept on it and have come to the reasoning that your suggestion that I am the "weak part of the pack"...is so very incorrect....I gave your notion great thought and did it with my ego put aside. Yes, I know admitting to oneself that they are a subordinate to the dog is a tough pill to swallow hence I investigated your premise with a very open mind. I have all too many indicators to suggest otherwise...
> 
> ...


 I would like to qualify little better when you say that I said that the dog is protection the handler. The dog is protection the handler and also itself. I thought that that was self evident. 
I do not know where you are located but i would like to show you that the aggression will disappear when someone else handles the dog. 
As far as your dog being aggressive on leash and not aggressive off leash is just supporting my reasoning.
Explanation: it is most likely caused by the fact that the dog is forced to be with you thus he needs to do what s/he needs to do for you 2 . But if the dog is off the leash then the dog is free of you so to speak and does not feel responsible for you as much and goes off to play with the dogs. 
*But the main reason is *that you are communicating to your dogs through the leash your worry. You hold the leash differently, more tight and maybe with 2 hands rather then one.And on top of it because you worry about the dog's aggression and you Alfonso breathe, walk and smell differently ., The dogs are absolutely attuned to such signs and you can not fake it. You dogs knows often better then you how you feel . 
That also presents another problem here many dogs will work on leash but not off leash that dogs think leash is off the handler is irrelevant .And that also applies to your situation. 
As far as that it is pill hard to swallow that the dog sees you as a subordinate to you is interesting. Yes you can kill your dog or not and thus you are in charge of the dog.
But that is not necessarily what the dog thinks. 
It is up to every leader to reach leadership position . Some are naturals and some need to work on it. But without the fact that the dog needs to see you you as a leader you will have many problems. As a matter of fact i will tell you that just about all behavioral problems are somehow intertwine with the fact that the handler is not able to communicate to her or his dog that they in fact are in leadership position. But do not feel bad. I would say that majority of dog owners today are not in leadership position.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

So, did not peruse the thread and responses, so this "answer" is in response to OP. 

Yes it's cheating. LOL. But, I think it depends on ultimate goals. 

For me. I want the dog to work FOR ME. Not for a toy. While that toy is important, it is solely as an extension of me. That toy, or more correctly, that INTERACTION with me, is the reward. I want a dog who wants to play WITH me, not just get the toy. To me that's an important distinction. 

Also, I am newb in IPO. I have gotten 1 dog through a BH before switching to SAR. I am working now, after 15 years for my second BH. So there is that. I am really big on the relationship. I want to see a dog pushing me for interaction. Not just grabbing a toy. So I like a dog that gets the toy and then slams it back into me. A dog that drops it at my feet and wants me to re engage. 

My current male is not a super high toy drive dog. But he brings it back. He shoves it into my hand. He wants me to engage him. We will never be on the podium. He is not that dog. He works for me. ( not that that has anything to do with getting on the podium or not) For praise, some tug, some bites. I am cool with that. 

So, sorry for the long post. But it's really about where you are going, what you want that final picture to be. 

All this said, I refuse to speak for others relationships with their dogs. Just because a dog is toy crazy, does not mean their relationship with their handler is less than I want. I have seen some amazing partnerships between dog and handler with dogs with levels of drives skewed from what I want. Bad grammar and sentence structure. Sorry. 

In the end it's about what works for you and your dog and what you want to accomplish. Don't let someone tell you your relationship with your dog is bad. You know your relationship.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager said:


> SuperG


* MAKING MATERS WORSE. *_
Next time when such handler walks such dog and he see's a strange dog the handler, based on last similar experience, get's worried about what is his dog going to do. OMG moment. 
His dog picks on such worries but misread them and sees them as a fear of his master of the strange dog. Thus that then reinforces the dog's conviction that the handler is not in leadership position and again became protective/aggressive towards the strange dog. This one with more intensity then the former one._ [/QUOTE]

Okay....this just jumped out at me...I'll agree that this happens with some perhaps...BUT....I actively search out dogs on leash/fenced or whatever....there is no "worried" handler in this equation....I continually hunt down other dogs and proof the dog in every situation where I can control proximity and the dog's behavior. It gives me a wonderful opportunity to work the dog's obedience and focus as I engage the dog. I appreciate the fact that one cannot fake or hide any trepidation one has in this situation... the dog sees through it. What you just described is basic 101 stuff....I'd like to think I have moved past the "emotional freaking out" handler...

Okay, while I was writing this...this popped up " _*But the main reason is *that you are communicating to your dogs through the leash your worry. You hold the leash differently, more tight and maybe with 2 hands rather then one.And on top of it because you worry about the dog's aggression and you Alfonso breathe, walk and smell differently ., The dogs are absolutely attuned to such signs and you can not fake it. You dogs knows often better then you how you feel _. " Okay, now you are becoming insulting....yeah, that's me walking with my dog with the strangle hold on the controls....come on..get off the 101 stuff. I'll sum it for you without making a list of examples about my life....I was not raised to be a passenger in life nor did I become a passenger in life..I am a driver, it is where I feel most comfortable. When the dog goes along on my bike rides I have a 24 foot lead of poly with a 6 foot section of shock cord spliced into it for a bit of cushion if it should ever be needed....gives me some leeway. The dog gaits beside me on the loosest of leash ( so no need for full length)...I say right, the dog goes right...same with left and straight. The picture you paint of me is hilarious and really insulting as I stated earlier. However, I have become amazingly adroit at riding my bike with no hands on the handle bars because I have both of my hands with the death grip on the long line........geeez..come on...give me a break.


SuperG


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

gsdsar said:


> Don't let someone tell you your relationship with your dog is bad. You know your relationship.


 Why not? I am a professional dog trainer and if the person's problem with their dog is caused by improper or unhealthy relationship with their dog then I am there to tell them that it is so. That is my job as a trainer and that is my place if I am dealing with the friend and his dog. To beat around the bush and not call spade - spade is not right. 
When trainer is asked by a person about their dog and problem they have and not to tell to such person if the relationship between the owner and his dog is the cause of such problem then it is only moral to tell them. What purpose would it serve not to tell them?


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

deleted


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

And how do you know without seeing it in person? I know very few dog trainers that will make such a determination without physically seeing the dog to evaluate. There is a very large difference between saying 'this could happen in this situation' and stating something as an absolute when you've never actually seen the dog and handler in person.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

deleted.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> *
> 
> Okay....this just jumped out at me...I'll agree that this happens with some perhaps...BUT....I actively search out dogs on leash/fenced or whatever....there is no "worried" handler in this equation....I continually hunt down other dogs and proof the dog in every situation where I can control proximity and the dog's behavior. It gives me a wonderful opportunity to work the dog's obedience and focus as I engage the dog. I appreciate the fact that one cannot fake or hide any trepidation one has in this situation... the dog sees through it. What you just described is basic 101 stuff....I'd like to think I have moved past the "emotional freaking out" handler...
> 
> ...


*

Well I am sorry I wasted my time on you and your time on reading my posts. 
Hopefully others got something out of what I have said. I must have been mistaken you for someone who wants to learn. Well I am sorry I insulted you. I tried to help to someone whose questions are on 101 novice level. Sorry that I misjudged you since it seems that you already know everything. How is it working out for you though? Jusat disergard all I said and continue doing what ever you do. Maybe you will get better results. 
God's speed and have a nice day. *


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Jax08 said:


> And how do you know without seeing it in person? I know very few dog trainers that will make such a determination without physically seeing the dog to evaluate. There is a very large difference between saying 'this could happen in this situation' and stating something as an absolute when you've never actually seen the dog and handler in person.


This is not a brain surgery and non is absolute. I am responding only based on what information I get from the poster. That is all we have. If we could respond here only based on seeing the dog then we could close this forum down because that is not physically possible.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

hmmmm...

Bad G! Bad!


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Prager said:


> Well I am sorry I wasted my time on you.
> Hopefully others got something out of what I have said. I must have been mistaken you for someone who wants to learn. Well I am sorry I insulted you. I tried to help to someone whose questions are on 101 novice level. Sorry that I misjudged you since it seems that you already know everything. How is it working out for you though?
> God's speed and have a nice day.


That's a cop out....you've gone from a robot to improper use of reward to a lack of "love" to no leadership to telegraphing emotional frailty to I must be holding the leash wrong....wow...you are clutching at "vegetation".

If I knew everything, I wouldn't be asking the questions I do...so your inferences about me are without merit.

I originally asked about fading out the reward...here's the question again " _However, what is the next step so I do not need any lure whatsoever but still get the same stare and focus ? I have heard some handlers put a ball under their armpit but do not know if that is typical? Anyway, I feel like I am still "cheating" to get the dog's full stare and focus_."...whether that is 101 question or not...this dog I have now is probably head and shoulders above most every dog I see on a regular basis. Yes, this forum has some wonderfully trained and developed dogs...I use these dogs as my inspiration.

Your very first words to me were " SuperG; if you look at it that way then the whole exercise is cheating."...I want to fade out the lure and you suggest I would still be cheating...amazing...simply amazing. My question actually states that I understand I am "cheating"..imagine that.

I appreciate the discourse with you and as I have said previously..I have learned....


SuperG


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

If Prager throws enough broad generalities around, something will have to be applicable to something, right? Kinda funny though, in the course of one short thread, he actually lost a lot of ground. He went from "Millions of Trainings" all the way down to "Thousands"


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Well I for one appreciate posts from those who have a lot of experience. If I disagree or don't like it I can ignore it.

How is Prager supposed to know how much experience a stranger on the internet has.

He probably won't be back so then people can all feel "comfortable" in their own little circles.

Personally I like to hear different views instead of the same old, same old.

Having said that I do wish some of the experienced people who were here when I first got here would please come back.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

SuperG said:


> That's a cop out....you've gone from a robot to improper use of reward to a lack of "love" to no leadership to telegraphing emotional frailty to I must be holding the leash wrong....wow...you are clutching at "vegetation".
> 
> If I knew everything, I wouldn't be asking the questions I do...so your inferences about me are without merit.
> 
> ...


No it is not a cap out. I gave you my best honest advice with intention to help. You disagreed and feel like I am making fun of you. I assure you nothing could be further from the truth. If your last post describes what you got out my explanations then I will be nice and I'll chalk it to my inability to communicate. OK enough said. I am not hereto change your mind.That you need to do your self,.. if you are so inclined.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well I for one appreciate posts from those who have a lot of experience. If I disagree or don't like it I can ignore it.
> 
> How is Prager supposed to know how much experience a stranger on the internet has.
> 
> ...


Jack's Dad thank you. The problem with unorthodox or different or unusual points views is that people who do not share them feel threatened by them because it invalidates and opposes what they were training or teaching often for many years. The fat is that there are more then one method possible to get to the target. I came on this forum because I do not enjoy personal fights and with hopes that I can share my experiences and opinions on training of dogs and potentially to learn something without peril of ridicule and insinuations. Kind of a a question and answer type back and forth from which we all could benefit. That is all I was hoping for.


----------



## Steve Strom (Oct 26, 2013)

Prager said:


> Jack's Dad thank you. The problem with unorthodox or different or unusual points views is that people who do not share them feel threatened by them because it invalidates and opposes what they were training or teaching often for many years. The fat is that there are more then one method possible to get to the target. I came on this forum because I do not enjoy personal fights and with hopes that I can share my experiences and opinions on training of dogs and potentially to learn something without peril of ridicule and insinuations. Kind of a a question and answer type back and forth from which we all could benefit. That is all I was hoping for.


I'll apologize now then Prager, and admit the cynic in me took over. I read it more of it just being a case of you harping on a personal disdain for the more precise, flashy, style of obedience because it doesn't fit in with what you sell. 
Sorry bout that.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Steve Strom said:


> I'll apologize now then Prager, and admit the cynic in me took over. I read it more of it just being a case of you harping on a personal disdain for the more precise, flashy, style of obedience because it doesn't fit in with what you sell.
> Sorry bout that.


Sorry is OK. 
Look I am not against flashy training of a dog. I enjoy tremendously when someone's dog or my dog prances in heel . It just beautiful. But lets not forget that there is performance for competition purposes and then there is a performance of every day life. They somewhat intermingle but generally they are vastly different, but these days most of the training is stemming from sport as if the training for every day life and performance in competition would be identical but it is not. I will admit that I am not expert by any means on sport, but that does not mean that I do not like it. I do like it, but just do not have enough time or energy to seriously participate after I am with clients and their dogs all day long trying to make some of them bite and other not to bite and bite a person and not the sleeve or bite the sleeve and not the person and not to piss in the house or chase cars or what ever and how to search and detect ... 
My domain is practical training. So if someone asks what to do when the dog does this or that which owner does not like or how to make the dog to do what the owner would like him to do, then I am in to me comfortable field . Have done it for decades ( 47 years) and I still love it. 

So again - thanks for your "sorry". I appreciate it since I know it is not easy to say it. On the other hand I too am sorry for my style of posting which some call preachy or too blunt or despotic and such. I am from different culture and we do not mince words and we call spade - spade. Black vs White, Up vs Down , Left vs Right . In dog world it is helpful to be that way. Kind of a John Wayne way. And in dog training it helps to be succinct , clear and direct. Here in USA culture it is considered abrasive. But you know what? I am who I am 62 years old so despite my efforts I am not going to change my manners that much. So if my style rubs you wrong way either do not read my posts or try to see what I am trying to say and we can always part as friends.


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Jack's Dad said:


> Well I for one appreciate posts from those who have a lot of experience. If I disagree or don't like it I can ignore it.
> 
> How is Prager supposed to know how much experience a stranger on the internet has.
> 
> ...



I'm glad you posted this...for many reasons. The most important reason being that different views makes one validate their own views...talking to "mirrors" many times accomplishes very little ..so the back and forth exchange of differences is healthy in my opinion...this is good. I believe the notion that others feel "threatened" as Prager suggested is perhaps a bit off the mark. Most everybody who has gotten to certain higher levels of ability didn't do it by being wrong....most of the people involved in this thread are as I said earlier " above my pay grade".

I see no reason why Prager would not remain and offer his opinion and experience..he has much to offer...this spirited exchange had value...certainly for me. Because of this thread, I have been motivated to revisit many sectors of how I interact with my dog because of Prager's responses. I certainly hope anybody who was active in this discussion would not be that thin-skinned to leave the forum.

I'll keep pestering people on this forum as I try and learn...and I will offer my limited experiences and lessons I have learned to others....


SuperG


----------



## SuperG (May 11, 2013)

Can't stop myself...I would greatly appreciate everyone who opined in this thread to give me some ideas on questions to ask an outfit that could either deal with me regarding my dog's leash reactivity or give a quality referral due to significant exposure to the breed to an appropriate trainer. I called a few IPO, "K-9" and other GSD clubs...I know the questions I might ask and I bet there are some other good questions I could ask that some of you might inquire about....I'd appreciate it.

Prager....I promise, even if someone says "make sure they put an emphasis on telegraphing through a tight leash" I will say nothing but a thank you. One other thing I think was of importance throughout this exchange...you always took the position of the onus is on the human...I'm all about that. So many people I know, get to a point with their dogs where they feel a bit let down and write it off as " Oh well, that's all the dog has to offer I guess". What compels me at times to be so damned annoying with folks in here is, I take this pretty personally since I can't blame it on the dog....end of story.


SuperG


----------



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

Prager said:


> I want him to respond because I said so. And that is his primary motivation and it should not matter if I have a tug toy or treat on me.


Well, duh. No matter what kind of training you do, that is the ultimate goal. Motivational training using food and toy rewards do not preclude realizing that goal. In my admittedly limited experience (5 GSDs in 28+ years), it can facilitate it. Done properly, those rewards are phased out over time. Being a "Pez dispenser" in the initial phase of training any particular behavior doesn't mean that you will need to have food on you at all times in order for the dog to comply. If you do still need to continually reward easy, long term behaviors, that's a failure of execution, not of the training method itself. The rate of reinforcement should always relate to the difficulty of whatever you're training, with new and difficult being much higher. 

As I mentioned in my very first post on this thread, I get lasting focus with my dogs by building it into daily life and making it a default behavior. But initially, I use plenty of food to establish that eye contact is a good thing and that they should seek it out frequently.


----------



## Prager (Jul 3, 2011)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Well, duh. No matter what kind of training you do, that is the ultimate goal. Motivational training using food and toy rewards do not preclude realizing that goal. In my admittedly limited experience (5 GSDs in 28+ years), it can facilitate it. Done properly, those rewards are phased out over time. Being a "Pez dispenser" in the initial phase of training any particular behavior doesn't mean that you will need to have food on you at all times in order for the dog to comply. If you do still need to continually reward easy, long term behaviors, that's a failure of execution, not of the training method itself. The rate of reinforcement should always relate to the difficulty of whatever you're training, with new and difficult being much higher.
> 
> As I mentioned in my very first post on this thread, I get lasting focus with my dogs by building it into daily life and making it a default behavior. But initially, I use plenty of food to establish that eye contact is a good thing and that they should seek it out frequently.


 Well first of all you can "not faze anything out" in conditioning and still benefit from it. Not for very long anyway. That had been stated here in error several times.If you faze the reward out soon enough you will faze out the desirable behavior which you trained for. If the conditioning is void of reward then the animal of any kind which can be conditioned will stop performing. Next you are mistaken what you are referring to as goal of the training with what I was talking about which is reason why the dog perform. 2 different things. Apples and oranges. 
You can achieve goal many ways but I am talking about what makes the dog tick. Does he do it primarily and solely because he wants a reward ? Or is he doing it because I said so and he has no other option but to obey or get corrected and then when he does it well he gets rewarded? So as you see you can not unite flippantly all methods as one with equal goal since one will make a dog who will perform fantastically on the competition field which is void of any distraction, but it will not perform so well in every day life setting full of distractions, where the other approach will do the exact opposite and will make a reliable dog in every day life which is what majority people want from their dogs but not as precision oriented competitor. Both of these methods can be used in the same time though so you can have competitor reliable in every day life,. But that requires employment of bothh of the methods. One for venue of competition and the other for every day life. But I would not advice to anyone to mix the purposes of these methods. Of course this is just my opinion and you can do as you wish especially if it works for you.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Send Ballif, Mycobracr, David Winners a PM with your location. They should have some connections and suggestions on good trainers in your area.

Other then that go to some training sessions/groups around you. The two things I like to see are the dogs happy, up and *doing well*. Meaning pupils who have been in the classes for awhile have dogs that are performing well. Trust your instincts. 

I like trainers that teach you how to set the dog up to succeed so that you can use positive reinforcement (treats, praise, happy dance parties  ) as much as possible and then layer on corrective type training. My first IPO trainer said for every correction he wants to see 10 positives. He also talked about releasing pressure, quickly, so when the dog performed the behavior you wanted you went from neutral to happy, happy, quickly.

Baillif has written a lot of good stuff about this recently. 

Hope this helps.



SuperG said:


> Can't stop myself...I would greatly appreciate everyone who opined in this thread to give me some ideas on questions to ask an outfit that could either deal with me regarding my dog's leash reactivity or give a quality referral due to significant exposure to the breed to an appropriate trainer. *I called a few IPO, "K-9" and other GSD clubs...I know the questions I might ask and I bet there are some other good questions I could ask that some of you might inquire about....I'd appreciate it.*
> 
> Prager....I promise, even if someone says "make sure they put an emphasis on telegraphing through a tight leash" I will say nothing but a thank you. One other thing I think was of importance throughout this exchange...you always took the position of the onus is on the human...I'm all about that. So many people I know, get to a point with their dogs where they feel a bit let down and write it off as " Oh well, that's all the dog has to offer I guess". What compels me at times to be so damned annoying with folks in here is, I take this pretty personally since I can't blame it on the dog....end of story.
> 
> ...


----------

