# Different training methods?



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

**Didn't think putting this in training would be appropriate since it's more of a discussion, but if a mod thinks it's better off there, feel free to move it**

Have any of you tried any different training methods other than R+? Which one do you think works the best with GSDs?

I've been a big fan of Cesar Millan for a while, but have recently found that his methods are being criticized as archaic, and primal. Have any of you used the "alpha leader" method with your dogs? How have they reacted? Was it succesful?

Same for the R+. Have you yielded satisfactory results?


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

I use what works and raise my dogs like my parents raised me: kind, firm, consistent leadership, clear direction, clear rewards and consequences. Respect on both sides. Keep the mind motivated and occupied and the body working so you rarely have to punish or correct. Clear boundaries with lots of room to grow.

Respect the fact that the dog is a dog. Don't expect him to be a human, a baby, or a weapon.


----------



## BlackthornGSD (Feb 25, 2010)

Hierarchy theory isn't a training method--it is not a means to *teach* your dog.


----------



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

BlackthornGSD said:


> Hierarchy theory isn't a training method--it is not a means to *teach* your dog.


Correct. Didn't know what else to call it.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

For training new behaviors I'm a big fan of shaping with the clicker. Lots of yummy treats, lots of enthusiasm and praise, ZERO punishment or correction when training something new. I find they learn very quickly this way, especially after the first few new behaviors. They learn how to learn and get more excited about trying new things.


----------



## BlackthornGSD (Feb 25, 2010)

I think there are many ways to be a leader that don't involve overt bullying or alpha rolls. In a good relationship with a dog, I would hope that the human would control the resources--space, food, doorways, water--and act as a leader, which includes support and protect their dog when he is uncertain or afraid as well as give guidance on correct/incorrect and desirable/undesirable behavior as the dog is growing up. 

Training is a way of communicating to your dog (or horse or chicken) in order to get the behavior you want. When training, I like to be informed on current learning theory, especially as applied to dogs, and use those principles to communicate what I want. 

In practice, I like to teach motivationally as much as possible. I follow the principle that a successful behavior will be repeated and an unsuccessful behavior will likely extinguish itself. And it's important to remember that the being that decides whether something is successful is not the human.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Best method to train a dog depends on what you are trying to teach as well as the dog itself.

Positive only is great WHEN it is appropriate! It certainly takes longer usually. I have used it very sucessfully to teah my pooch many tricks - like play dead, roll over, etc.

However Pos Only was an absolute failure when it came time to address his sometimes DA to certain other dogs. Other method worked much better with that behavior.

Too many pos only advocates that I have run into here have suggested "Avoidance" in many of the circumstances I have asked about.

For example, I asked one head trainer how to stop my dog from "counter surfing" - her answer was ridicuolus (to me anyway) - it was "don't leave anything interesting to the dog on the counter!". Didn't seem like any training at all to me! Old fashioned method of a sharp "NO" a few times had a much better effect on his behavior. And my dog still loves me and doesn't cower in fear at least not yet. (She kind of suggested that would happen if i ever "corrected" (Punished?) him for any bad behavior).

With his DA, the suggestion was to "turn around and go to a greater distance". Nope, never worked.

But it might work with some dogs - just not with others.

Best trainers have a wide and deep toolbox to draw from based on the dog and environment.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

Caesar Milan isn't a dog trainer, he is a rehabilitation. He doesn't work with dogs who just need basic obedience, and he's not a trainer. He uses the methods that work the best for individual dogs. I've seen him use food for fearful dogs to use as a tool to reward behaviors that are good. He uses body language to communicate to a dog that he is alpha. He does not get angry or frustrated with a dog, and he does not alpha roll every dog he comes across. The only ones he does that on are extremely dominate cases. I have only seen him do it a couple of times. His touches are another way to correct a dog, similar to a collar correction, that are intended to break the dog's focus and redirect it into a calmer, submissive state of mind. He uses body blocking to communicate that he is the alpha of the space, he owns it, and the dog must submit to his will while in that space. He uses verbal corrections to correct minor offenses and builds to a physical touch when the dog continues the unwanted behavior. 

Everything listed above, save for the alpha roll, is okay to do, correct? Many people give collar and verbal corrections to their dog. Many people do (or should) use body blocking in order to prevent a dog from charging the door/crate/food/whatever else. These are things you do to assert yourself as alpha. If you think that you don't need to be your dog's alpha, then your dogs probably do not listen to you very much. 

Now, I'm not saying that you have to be the alpha that is uber controlling and doesn't let the dog do anything and is constantly dominating the dog/being over powering/unfairly correcting them constantly. That is a person who rules by fear. Once you have established yourself as alpha, it is important that you are a good alpha. An alpha that rules with love and respect. You and your dog are in a partnership, but you are the leader and your dog is the follower. They must understand that they are under you, and that you are the one who decides what they can and cannot do. It's the same way parents must be dominant over their kids: it's important to set rules and boundaries otherwise they run rampant and develop behavioral issues. You must be calm and in control at all times. I feel that people who try Caesar's techniques and say they don't work are probably doing them wrong. There's a reason why there's a disclaimer on each episode before it airs. :3

Anyways, that kind of turned into a ramble. This is what I do to train my animals:

1: When building a foundation for behaviors I always use positive reinforcement for good behaviors, and I correct bad behaviors IF I catch them in the act of doing it. It is impossible to give a proper correction if they're not in the process of doing the bad thing. A second too late and you are punishing them for no reason and they do not understand why. Positive reinforcement should be very, very exuberant: lots of praise along with treats, and I'm always very excited. As soon as I stop being excited about it, the dog stops performing as well. Corrections are simple and not drawn out: a simple NO or OFF or CHH, maybe a collar correction depending on what's being done. Possible redirection to wanted behavior used depending on what's happening.

And of course the most important thing with any training: Patience, persistence, and consistency are the most important things! Know what you're doing before you try it with your dog, and don't switch things up all the time! It is also important to know your dog and to be flexible enough to realize that a training method that worked with your old dog might not work with your new dog. :3


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

I don't "assert myself as alpha". I've never found it necessary. If you teach a dog house rules/manners and work on their training, I've found that them following your lead comes naturally without any need to "dominate" them.
I've used clicker and marker training with Bianca. Her previous owners used more "traditional" methods and a prong collar but I found she was really under-confident when I got her, and I think the type of corrections they used also increased her leash reactivity which was quite severe when I got her and any collar pressure at all would amp her up and/or reduce her threshold a lot. The clicker training and removing any collar corrections both helped her reactivity, and I was able to get her much more confident as well. I retrained the basics with her using the clicker, I taught her English commands as she was so rusty on the German anyway (although she'll still Sitz and Platz if asked) and then I went beyond that to things she hadn't been previously taught.


----------



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

Do you think it is possible and not confusing to the dog to do both? ie. Use positive reinforcement in obedience training, but also perform hierarchy rituals such as not letting the dog walk out the door fist, making sure the dog is almost next to, if not behind you on walks, use the jerk and release method for corrections on walks, etc.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

BlackLite said:


> Do you think it is possible and not confusing to the dog to do both? ie. Use positive reinforcement in obedience training, but also perform hierarchy rituals such as not letting the dog walk out the door fist, making sure the dog is almost next to, if not behind you on walks


I just think those are silly. What if I don't _want _to go outside? Do I go out the door first and then come back in? My dogs don't rush the door, they wait for the release word to go out, but if I go out first there's a 80lb dog standing between me and the door, and I need to lock the door so I have him walk around me, but then the leash is wrapped around me. . . . It's just easier to give him the release word and let him go first, so he's where he needs to be while I lock up. 

And the whole walking thing-- I've never made a dog walk beside or behind me and I can promise you there's never been any confusion about who was the leader. 

You can do them if you want, I don't think they hurt anything; I just think they're silly and unnecessary.


----------



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

Emoore said:


> I just think those are silly. What if I don't _want _to go outside? Do I go out the door first and then come back in? My dogs don't rush the door, they wait for the release word to go out, but if I go out first there's a 80lb dog standing between me and the door, and I need to lock the door so I have him walk around me, but then the leash is wrapped around me. . . . It's just easier to give him the release word and let him go first, so he's where he needs to be while I lock up.
> 
> And the whole walking thing-- I've never made a dog walk beside or behind me and I can promise you there's never been any confusion about who was the leader.
> 
> You can do them if you want, I don't think they hurt anything; I just think they're silly and unnecessary.


I guess that's why the call it a theory. I've never had the necessity to do it, since my current dog is a 2lb chihuahua. But like I said, I've spent years watching Cesar Millans show, and with a dog like a GSD, you need to show you are leader. Can this be achieved by doing obedience training with P+?


----------



## GregK (Sep 4, 2006)

I let my dogs out the door first when I don't care if they got out first. They also walk ahead of me when lose leash walking and none of there 12 are 'alpha' over me. 

All that stuff is nonsense.

There are far more better ways to teach a dog to walk on leash than the jerk and release method.

To answer your question, no it shouldn’t confuse the dog.


----------



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

Don't get the wrong idea. I'm not saying I'm an advocate of this stuff. Like I've said, I've just watched a lot of Dog Whisperer and was just wondering if those techniques actually do work.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

I'm on my 3rd GSD and I've never used any of the techniques you mention. My obedience training is largely reward-based, with only rare and minor corrections. I practice a loose form of NILIF-- making the dog obey a command for something he wants. There's no mistaking who's the leader-- I decide when they eat, when they sleep, where their beds and crates go, when they play and exercise. I begin and end play sessions and training sessions. When we tug, I usually let him win but he must "drop it" on command. It's not like they don't know that I control every aspect of their lives.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

I'm not a fan of Cesar's methods by any means, it's a inaccurate look at dog hierarchy. "Dominance" and not being a leader is the blame of too many things that are totally irrelevant to the true cause. And I could go on an and on about my dislikes.
The Dominance Controversy | Philosophy | Dr. Sophia Yin, DVM, MS

I take things I like from a bunch of different methods and apply them. It varies from dog to dog as well, Dakota I direct with my voice a lot but with Alice I rely on body language as she's soft to tones. And Alice doesn't work well when she's overly excited, she becomes scatterbrained (which is improving), whilst Dakota can work well in high excitement situations.

I like NILF and Premack, making them earn everything and using their environment as a reward as well.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

BlackLite said:


> Do you think it is possible and not confusing to the dog to do both? ie. Use positive reinforcement in obedience training, but also perform hierarchy rituals such as not letting the dog walk out the door fist, making sure the dog is almost next to, if not behind you on walks, use the jerk and release method for corrections on walks, etc.


I can't speak to all of that, but as for the first part -- whether it is confusing to use both -- perhaps it is, but I'm finding in my circumstance, I have to. Pure positive just doesn't get it. OR I'm just doing it wrong. That's a distinct possibility.



GregK said:


> I let my dogs out the door first when I don't care if they got out first. They also walk ahead of me when lose leash walking and none of there 12 are 'alpha' over me.
> 
> All that stuff is nonsense.
> 
> ...


My three dogs, who I've had since pups - I don't care if they go out first. They don't rush, they just walk down the stairs. Easy pacheesie. Newest guy? NOT. He will rush the stairs 1000 mph, dragging my butt behind. It is just straight-up necessary to *not* let him go first. So I can't say all that stuff is total nonsense.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

Chicagocanine said:


> I don't "assert myself as alpha". I've never found it necessary. If you teach a dog house rules/manners and work on their training, I've found that them following your lead comes naturally without any need to "dominate" them.
> I've used clicker and marker training with Bianca. Her previous owners used more "traditional" methods and a prong collar but I found she was really under-confident when I got her, and I think the type of corrections they used also increased her leash reactivity which was quite severe when I got her and any collar pressure at all would amp her up and/or reduce her threshold a lot. The clicker training and removing any collar corrections both helped her reactivity, and I was able to get her much more confident as well. I retrained the basics with her using the clicker, I taught her English commands as she was so rusty on the German anyway (although she'll still Sitz and Platz if asked) and then I went beyond that to things she hadn't been previously taught.


Ah! This reminds me of what I was forgetting.

If you start from a young age and are a gentle leader from the start, using positive reinforcement to teach proper behaviors right off the bat, then there is no need to use "dominant" training methods because you have been acting as alpha since the pup was young, and so it has had no reason to try and fill the position since you're doing such a good job yourself. If you use dominant training methods on a puppy that are more severe then would be necessary for a puppy (since pups aren't really trying to "be the boss" until adulthood), then you can end up with an overly submissive, unconfident dog, which can lead to its own problems. I think that you should always use the lowest level correction possible in order to avoid being an "unfair" leader. The problem is that people tend to get frustrated and so the correction level goes up even if the action leading to it isn't that severe. : ( 

The dogs you see on the Dog Whisperer were not raised in an environment where their owners acted as pack leaders. They are all people that did not know how to properly raise a puppy and how to naturally assert themselves through training, etc. When Caesar comes into these situations, these dogs have usually been living as alpha for a long time. They need to be reminded that it is not their job to be alpha, and that it's okay to relax. Being alpha is not an easy job for a dog, and comes with a lot of stress. They have to make sure everyone is doing what they're supposed to be doing and if anyone goes outside of their boundaries they have to correct them (lol, sound familiar?) It's a full time job. But of course, if you act as alpha for your dogs you already know this. Caesar comes in an takes that stress away from them, which can be difficult and stressful for a dog if that's what it's become used to. No one likes change. But in the end it leads to a happier, healthier, less stressed pup, and once it is removed from that mindset it becomes easier to maintain the alpha position using positive methods and less corrections, since the dog is not longer trying to maintain the alpha position.

Maybe it's the word "alpha" that people have such an aversion to? It's just another word for leader. I think everyone agrees that you should be your dog's leader, right?


----------



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

I do agree that you need to be your dogs leader. My question is, how do you 100% assert yourself as your dogs leader? Just teaching them to sit, stay, and beg, and telling them what not to do?


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

Lol to me the word alpha is like claws on the chalkboard. I think it carries a lot of negative connotations and a lot of outdated beliefs.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The person that I highly respect and I have trained all my dogs with, does encourage the not letting the dog walk out the door first, and that kind of stuff, while she is mainly positive, and also is not afraid of corrections. I have never done it and have never had a problem. 

My dogs know that I have the food bag, I fill the water buckets, and I clean the poop. If all that stuff mattered that much, then my dogs probably think I am some sort of servant that they treat really, really good. 

I do everything wrong and it works for me and my dogs -- I currently have 10 GSDs. I am sure Cesar could do exactly what I do with my dogs and get good results too, better, as I think he is more of a natural than I am. 

I think Cesar can feel what to do with a particular dog for a particular problem, as he assesses it, and he can results. But then he has to be able to give his dog-owners a method to get the same results. And they aren't Cesars. So he has had to develop or adopt a method of teaching people how to manage their dogs without that instinct. 

That is really hard. Because I can guaranty you that your dog will respond to positive only training, or training with compulsion, or training with positive and compulsion/leadership. 

The trick to being a trainer is matching the trainer to a training method that they can and will both believe in and perform with patience consistency. A lot of people are not patient enough for positive only training, whatever that is. More people can be patient and consistent enough for mostly positive. But people who are having problems with their dogs are probably having problems with themselves at being patient and consistent. These people need a method that will give results. They need to hear that with a GSD you must be a leader. They need to have the fear of God put into them, or their dog is going on a one way trip to the vet. So having them change their management style and giving clear directions, and a few strong training tools, might be the only way to go with those people.

The problem is not with the dogs. It is with the handlers. Cesar assesses dogs and tries to train people to manage them.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

One question - how many of us regular owner/trainers have ever had to deal with a truly dominant dog? My guess is "not many" as compared with a real pro like Ceasar. He usually will only get the "hard cases" not the ordinary stubborn dog.

And despite what a few folks might think and theorize about, there are some HUGE differences among dogs even of the same breed, age and sex.

As a small example - my own now 4yo male GSD once decided that he did not want my experienced pro trainer to put his leash and collar on when she came over to walk him while i was laid up from knee replacement surgery. Now this was a trainer that we had been going to for classes and pvt. lessons to for well over 1.5 years. He would not let her and even backed her out of the dog run - not overtly aggressive just extremely pushy and would not listen. I eventually had to limp out to the fenced back yard and put him back in his run.

I think he scared the heck out of her (never volunteered to try again and never handled him again in any of the succeeding classes with her).

Think that a R+ approach alone would work with him? NAH! Didn't work for some behavior modification that we had to undertake!

Most dogs - sure would work great but a few of them.

Some dogs are genetically disposed to be pushy and want to do what they want when they want to - just like some dogs are genetically weak nerved other are Strong nerved.

Be glad if you don't run into one of these! Unless you want a real challenge - but it is fun when you get them to realize it is in their own best interest to listen and obey! Plus he is really cute!!!!!!!!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

BlackLite said:


> I do agree that you need to be your dogs leader. My question is, how do you 100% assert yourself as your dogs leader? Just teaching them to sit, stay, and beg, and telling them what not to do?


See, I do not ascribe to Cesar's methods because I do not need them. I start at the beginning with a dog, and build a bond. The way to build the bond is by being confident, patient, and consistent. The best way to get started is through training the basics. As your dog sees you as confident and you are patient and consistent, he builds his trust in you. Setting him up to succeed, and then praising him for doing right what you set up for him to do right, builds his confidence both in you and in himself. And you start building confidence in him. 

It is not an equal relationship. You have the praise, treats, you give the commands, you need to go to the vet, not to the beach this afternoon. But it isn't about being bigger and stronger and tougher than the dog, and showing him that you are. There is no question about who is in charge. The dog knows it, I know it, I don't even think about it. I do not have to keep him off the sofa or bed or eat before him or walk through doorways first.

The dog is smart, a lot smarter than we give them credit for sometimes. 

Some people say that you shouldn't let your puppy see you clean up a mess they made. Really? What is that supposed to do, make the puppy think you are some sort of slave? Our dogs don't think like that. 

If the dog gives his animal-trust to you, and you condition him to perform actions on cue, then you need not worry about alpha-garbage. If the dog thinks you are totally off your gourd because sometimes you yell, and sometimes you cuddle and sometimes you call him to berate him when he comes and sometimes you order him to do something that he has no idea what your are talking about, then you need dominance training to train your to be more consistent. So that your cues are consistent, so that your dog can start gaining confidence in you. 

Ok, I'm rambling.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Just a random thought from reading this whole thread - would R+ training work in the military boot camp environment? If not, why not?

The only folks who should answer would be those who have gone trough such people training, of course.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

BlackLite said:


> Do you think it is possible and not confusing to the dog to do both? ie. Use positive reinforcement in obedience training, but also perform hierarchy rituals such as not letting the dog walk out the door fist, making sure the dog is almost next to, if not behind you on walks, use the jerk and release method for corrections on walks, etc.


Yes, this is the method I use. If you are 100% positive reinforcement then you don't use physical corrections at all, mostly verbal "ah!" and then ignoring. This can take quite a long time, but some people think it's better for the dog, and it definitely is better if you need a confident dog like a Schutzhund prospect. However, positive training methods along with correcting bad behavior is what a lot of people do, and it works as long as you are rewarding and correcting properly. Timing is essential, which is why a lot of people use clickers so they can mark the exact second the dog does the correct behavior. This bridges the gap between correct action performed and when the treat it actually given, and helps the dog grasp the proper behavior quicker.



Emoore said:


> I just think those are silly. What if I don't _want _to go outside? Do I go out the door first and then come back in? My dogs don't rush the door, they wait for the release word to go out, but if I go out first there's a 80lb dog standing between me and the door, and I need to lock the door so I have him walk around me, but then the leash is wrapped around me. . . . It's just easier to give him the release word and let him go first, so he's where he needs to be while I lock up.
> 
> And the whole walking thing-- I've never made a dog walk beside or behind me and I can promise you there's never been any confusion about who was the leader.
> 
> You can do them if you want, I don't think they hurt anything; I just think they're silly and unnecessary.


You are, believe it or not, asserting your dominance over your dog by making him wait for your command before leaving. Congratulations, you've raised your dog properly and are acting as his alpha. He has grown up to accept this, and you do not need to go to more drastic measures to assert your dominance.



Emoore said:


> I'm on my 3rd GSD and I've never used any of the techniques you mention. My obedience training is largely reward-based, with only rare and minor corrections. I practice a loose form of NILIF-- making the dog obey a command for something he wants. There's no mistaking who's the leader-- I decide when they eat, when they sleep, where their beds and crates go, when they play and exercise. I begin and end play sessions and training sessions. When we tug, I usually let him win but he must "drop it" on command. It's not like they don't know that I control every aspect of their lives.


You are also being alpha for you dog, and doing a good job of it. : ) NILIF IS a form of asserting your dominance. Dogs that are raised with an calm assertive leader grow up to be calm submissive dogs. That is why you do not need to make blatant dominance displays. But let me tell you, the little things that you do speak volumes to your dogs and that is why they respect you as their leader, because that is what you do for them.



BlackLite said:


> I do agree that you need to be your dogs leader. My question is, how do you 100% assert yourself as your dogs leader? Just teaching them to sit, stay, and beg, and telling them what not to do?


If you are raising a puppy, it is important that you decide on basic house rules first: Where is the puppy allowed in the house? What is the puppy allowed to play with/chew? Is the puppy allowed on the furniture? The bed? Where is the puppy supposed to potty? When is the puppy supposed to sleep? This is the basic start for building your role as leader. Watch your puppy closely and if you see it doing something it's not supposed to do, say "no" in a strong, but not angry, voice and redirect the puppy to a more appropriate activity (i.e.: puppy is chewing on a shoe, you say no and then direct the puppy to a toy, once puppy plays with the toy give LOTS of praise to let it know it's good to play with the toy), and if you see your puppy doing a good behavior, liking playing with its proper toy, give it lots of praise.

As the puppy gets older, start working on obedience. Some good first things to do is to make the puppy sit before it gets its food, so it starts to learn that it has to do what you say before it can eat. When teaching commands like "sit, down, stay, come" always mark the behavior with a word, I used "Good dog" but a lot of people use "yes." This does the same thing as the clicker which is to let a dog know it has done the proper behavior and it will be rewarded shortly. Give lots of treats and praise and be very enthusiastic. This will help the puppy be more engaged during training.

In older dogs, it is similar, but you don't have to be as gentle as you do with younger dogs. Of course it varies from dog to dog, and you should never use a correction that is higher than a dog can take (some dogs are very sensitive and a simple "no" will send them into submission while some dogs can take a full strength yank with a prong collar and not even flinch). You basically just have to set boundaries for your dog and show it that you are the leader and that you make all the decisions. 

Of course, if you have any doubt about what to do, I highly suggest finding a good trainer. : ) Don't be discouraged if one trainer's method doesn't do what you want, training is not a "one size fits all" deal, and it can take a couple tries to find someone who works for you and your dogs. 

Hope that helped. : )


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

Emoore said:


> Lol to me the word alpha is like claws on the chalkboard. I think it carries a lot of negative connotations and a lot of outdated beliefs.


Same for me, similar with "Dominance" not because I feel that it is a negative thing, but the most common usage of it is very inaccurate and has a similar association to outdated beliefs that "alpha" does. 


I have worked with a lot of dogs, none I would label as really dominant, but almost all would be labeled such by others. I guess one you could call such since he had zero boundaries and felt he could just push everyone around for everything. (big stubborn Rott)
It was easily fixed though, just made him work for everything, more so then other dogs. He had to sit before going through all doors, sit before going off leash, sit before going out of his kennel, etc. After 2 sessions he started to pay attention to me when before I was an annoying spec at the end of the leash. 

With all the dogs I work with at the shelter, except special cases (fearful dogs that we're focusing on confidence, or overly spastic puppies that need to get some energy out before we start training.) , I have them sit before going through doors. Not for leaderly reasons, it's just polite, helps prevent door darting, and makes them more apt to get adopted. 

Before I delve into working with reactivity, aggression, guarding, etc I like to do basics with the dog first to get a feel for how they work, how quick they catch on, etc.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

selzer said:


> See, I do not ascribe to Cesar's methods because I do not need them.


Exactly. :3 A lot of people see his methods as being over the top because they know their dog and can't imagine using those methods on their dog, when in reality if they were to use those methods on their dog it would probably cause more harm then good because there is already a dom/sub relationship formed between them and there is mutual respect. 

The dogs he works with though are often on their last strike, and have had several trainers in the past. "I've tried everything," is what I hear on that show a lot. So they are not dogs that have been raised with a calm assertive leader, instead they've got this crazy person sending them all kinds of confusing signals, as you described. XD


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

codmaster said:


> One question - how many of us regular owner/trainers have ever had to deal with a truly dominant dog? My guess is "not many" as compared with a real pro like Ceasar. He usually will only get the "hard cases" not the ordinary stubborn dog.
> 
> And despite what a few folks might think and theorize about, there are some HUGE differences among dogs even of the same breed, age and sex.
> 
> ...



Yes, I have had truly dominant dogs. I totally disagree that a positive approach will not work with any dog, if the handler believes in it. At the same time, you might not be able to go from A to Z in twenty minutes. Remember, that you need to gain the trust of the animal. My totally non-dominant dogs are not going to let the trainer come to my house, when I am not out there, go into their kennel and collar them. The confident ones might. There are one or two that no-way would they let her, not because they are dominant, but they are fearful, and though they have all seen her and been in classes with her, none of them have seen her in my yard without me there trying to get them out of their kennel.

The dogs that my contractor thinks are mean, and will not go into the kennel with are those that are scared, they are not dominant. My pack-lead bitch will let my contractor in her kennel without me being out there. The confident ones will. Nothing to do with dominance, has to do with confidence.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

AkariKuragi said:


> Exactly. :3 A lot of people see his methods as being over the top because they know their dog and can't imagine using those methods on their dog, when in reality if they were to use those methods on their dog it would probably cause more harm then good because there is already a dom/sub relationship formed between them and there is mutual respect.
> 
> The dogs he works with though are often on their last strike, and have had several trainers in the past. "*I've tried everything*," is what I hear on that show a lot. So they are not dogs that have been raised with a calm assertive leader, instead they've got this crazy person sending them all kinds of confusing signals, as you described. XD


Don't you hear though, the impatience in that statement? 

It is the people, not the dog. They have tried everything. For what? Five minutes, three days? The people need training. They need a radical change. 

How many of you can tell your dog to "Go lay down" or "down" or "go lay on my bed" or "lay your boney butt down" and the dog will do it every time regardless of the number of words or phrase that you use? Or when you mean Down, and you say Sit and the dog downs? Can you say STAY and WAIT interchangeably, HEEL or WALK or WITH ME? 

Do they listen to our body language more than our words? 

Some people are told to ALWAYS you DOWN, SIT, COME, STAY or you will confuse the dog. Totally unnecessary. The dog is smart, and he can understand sentences like, wait a minute and I will get you a piece of cheese. He can also manage to heel whether you say HEEL or WALK. He will pay attention whether you say LOOK or WATCH or CUJO. But the handler needs to learn to be consistent in their body language, and they need the verbal cues to teach their body what it needs to do. They need to say DOWN and not go lay down, because one is a command and the other is a conversation or even a question -- hate that when people curl up the end of their commands into questions. 

I am convinced our dogs laugh at us regularly.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

selzer said:


> Yes, I have had truly dominant dogs.* How did you diagnose this attribute for your own dogs?*
> 
> *I totally disagree that a positive approach will not work with any dog, if the handler believes in it.* At the same time, you might not be able to go from A to Z in twenty minutes. *Does PO take longer usually?*
> 
> ...


Some confident dogs will let strangers in, and some will not - depends on more than confidence - i.e. threshhold for example.

My guy was called "the most self confident dog that she has ever seen" after working with him for quite a while.

But everyone has their own opinion about how to relate to and train their dogs - I say whatever works for you is the method to use.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

I might have misread your post but I agree on the "I've tried everything" Selzer. Even on forums I've heard it many, many times and when someone suggests something simple to us, they act like it's totally new and unheard of. Some people don't want to put effort in and want a quick fix.

A few members of my family have come to me telling me t they've "Tried everything!", I suggested things and in the end they brought the dog over. 20 minute sessions and everything was better. (One was very simple, jumping, others weren't as simple, fear, DA, etc.) 

And I've seen it at the shelter and in training classes, folks will return dogs in not even a week saying that they've tried everything and they can't fix it so they want a different dog. 

I hate saying it, but, my expectations of the general public are very low and I generally do not trust their word in some situations. Guess that's just a mindset built from working at a shelter for several years.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

selzer said:


> Don't you hear though, the impatience in that statement?
> 
> It is the people, not the dog. They have tried everything. For what? Five minutes, three days? The people need training. They need a radical change.
> 
> ...


I do hear the impatience, and I agree with you that it is the owner that needs to be taught how to be a leader and the dog will follow. This is what Ceaser does, he's always saying he's not training the dog, he's training the owner how to properly communicate with his dog. I really feel like people think that he's some kind of crazy insane dictator that is all about beating dogs and "showing them who's boss" by physically over powering them when he very rarely does that. He's more about effectively communicating your dominance to your dog in a way that it can understand, mostly through body language. He's always saying that dogs don't understand English, but if you have the vision of what you want your dog to do in your head, that's what's going to happen. A kind of self fulfilling prophecy, if you will.

The command confusion thing is mostly when the dog is first learning a trick. If you're constantly changing the command you are using then the dog can become confused, but once it knows the command and what you are asking of it, it will often read you and know what you are asking even if you use a different word.

Though I don't agree with the "wait and I'll give you some cheese" sentence thing... If I don't tell Lei Lani to stay when I'm preparing something she'll be all up in my business. XD Mostly because stay is a formal command and "wait" is more of a casual thing that is open for discussion. Of course if you said it in the same way you'd say stay, then she'd probably stay, but then I wonder why not say stay in the first place? There are times when I want to have a conversation with my dog, and I'm not asking for 100% compliance, but when I am serious I do expect them to listen.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

How I train or what methods I use depends on the dog, the situation, what I am training and for what I am training.


----------



## Chance&Reno (Feb 21, 2012)

AkariKuragi said:


> Ah! This reminds me of what I was forgetting.
> 
> If you start from a young age and are a gentle leader from the start, using positive reinforcement to teach proper behaviors right off the bat, then there is no need to use "dominant" training methods because you have been acting as alpha since the pup was young, and so it has had no reason to try and fill the position since you're doing such a good job yourself. If you use dominant training methods on a puppy that are more severe then would be necessary for a puppy (since pups aren't really trying to "be the boss" until adulthood), then you can end up with an overly submissive, unconfident dog, which can lead to its own problems. I think that you should always use the lowest level correction possible in order to avoid being an "unfair" leader. The problem is that people tend to get frustrated and so the correction level goes up even if the action leading to it isn't that severe. : (
> 
> ...


Very well put and I agree 100%. I can't even begin to tell you how many people attribute every little problem the dog has to being "alpha". "He won't let me touch his feet because he's alpha", "he poops on the carpet because he's alpha", "he pulls on the leash because he's alpha". It's reduclous. I spend 90% of my time, as a trainer, explaining to people these aren't "alpha" problems but something you need to teach them to do properly. 




selzer said:


> Some people say that you shouldn't let your puppy see you clean up a mess they made. Really? What is that supposed to do, make the puppy think you are some sort of slave? Our dogs don't think like that.


I've never heard it described like that, but what I have heard is that it's some kind of affection. Giving affection while cleaning poop.. I know it sounds silly but many many people believe that... "I love you so much that I'm gonna sit here and clean yer poo!".. lol



Cschmidt88 said:


> I might have misread your post but I agree on the "I've tried everything" Selzer. Even on forums I've heard it many, many times and when someone suggests something simple to us, they act like it's totally new and unheard of. Some people don't want to put effort in and want a quick fix.
> 
> A few members of my family have come to me telling me t they've "Tried everything!", I suggested things and in the end they brought the dog over. 20 minute sessions and everything was better. (One was very simple, jumping, others weren't as simple, fear, DA, etc.)
> 
> ...


Not just working at a shelter, but many trainers feel the same way.
I had a guy come to me and ask me for a "shock collar". He has an English Mastiff who is 2 years old. The dog just recently started growling at the husband and wife when they try to take things away from him. The husband told me that his "friend" has an English Mastiff and he "shocked him" every time he growled at them. "He would point the remote at the dog's face and zap him on the highest level. The dog would scream and instantly stop growling, relinquishing anything he had". 
I tried to explain to the guy why this was a bad idea and he stormed out of my facility. His wife stuck behind and we chatted for a few more minutes and she told me her husband had punched the dog in the face, kicked it in the testicles, and poked it in the eye when the dog would do something wrong. When that stopped working, he wanted the shock collar to escalate the corrections. She said, exact words, "I am in fear for my life if he puts that on my dog". I gave her the name of a trainer who specializes in training Mastiffs and to call the trainer ASAP to seek help. 
Her husband is an ******** and she readily admitted to me that the husband is forcfully exherting dominance over the dog because of his sheer size. 
If I really wanted to call the police and report him, but I can't as I have not witnessed this and asking for a "shock collar" isn't a crime. 
Most of the people I deal with ONLY want the quick fix, they want to put NO effort into their dogs because they "should already know what I'm asking". UGH!


----------



## GregK (Sep 4, 2006)

chelle said:


> He will rush the stairs 1000 mph, dragging my butt behind. It is just straight-up necessary to *not* let him go first. So I can't say all that stuff is total nonsense.


The nonsense part would be that he's doing this due to 'dominance'.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

Chance&Reno said:


> Not just working at a shelter, but many trainers feel the same way.
> I had a guy come to me and ask me for a "shock collar". He has an English Mastiff who is 2 years old. The dog just recently started growling at the husband and wife when they try to take things away from him. The husband told me that his "friend" has an English Mastiff and he "shocked him" every time he growled at them. "He would point the remote at the dog's face and zap him on the highest level. The dog would scream and instantly stop growling, relinquishing anything he had".
> I tried to explain to the guy why this was a bad idea and he stormed out of my facility. His wife stuck behind and we chatted for a few more minutes and she told me her husband had punched the dog in the face, kicked it in the testicles, and poked it in the eye when the dog would do something wrong. When that stopped working, he wanted the shock collar to escalate the corrections. She said, exact words, "I am in fear for my life if he puts that on my dog". I gave her the name of a trainer who specializes in training Mastiffs and to call the trainer ASAP to seek help.
> Her husband is an ******** and she readily admitted to me that the husband is forcfully exherting dominance over the dog because of his sheer size.
> ...


That poor dog, and yes I've seen this in classes too. Thankfully, being an assistant, I help the willing folks while the head trainer works with the more difficult people. I don't know if I'd have the patience to deal with such abusive people. Do you know if they went to the other trainer?


----------



## Chance&Reno (Feb 21, 2012)

Cschmidt88 said:


> That poor dog, and yes I've seen this in classes too. Thankfully, being an assistant, I help the willing folks while the head trainer works with the more difficult people. I don't know if I'd have the patience to deal with such abusive people. Do you know if they went to the other trainer?


I called the other trainer and alerted them to the situation. As of yet, they have not contacted the other trainer. I think they purchased a e-collar and attempted what the husband wanted to. I'm sure I'll be hearing about the dog mauling the husband and being PTS. It kills me I can't do anything about it as they would not leave their contact information with me. I referred them because my impression of the husband was that he didn't respect women (wife also gave me that impression). The other trainer is a man. I was hoping that if they consulted the other trainer, that he would take it seriously. Nothing pleases me more than to see a jerk like that put in his place. I just wish it wouldn't be at the cost of his dog's life. 
I have cameras inside and outside of the facility, so I kept the footage of their vehicle and license plate number. Not that I could do anything with that but you never know. The cameras do not have audio. I may upgrade to ones with audio for documentation purposes. This isn't the first time that I've encountered that type of person and had that kind of conversation with people.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

I'll use whatever method works, staying away from most physical corrections, it depends on what dog is standing in front of me. In most cases I think consistency is the key to good training, and a lot of people don't have the patience it takes to _be_ consistent.


----------



## ShatteringGlass (Jun 1, 2006)

I use what works and what makes everything as black & white for my dog as possible. To be as clear as possible my dog, I give him a balance of "yes you did something right", and "no, you did something wrong".

The thing I can never get a clear answer from people who never use physical corrections is, Why do you accept that dogs can take physical corrections perfectly fine from other dogs, but not from a human? If my male is irritating my female, she will snap at him, and he learns and moves on. His feelings are not hurt, he doesn't crumble and fall apart, he LEARNS not to do that. But somehow we have to act like dogs don't learn from corrections when it comes to training, and if you use them, you are just not competant enough to do an elaborate song and dance for the sake of using treats only.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

ShatteringGlass said:


> I use what works and what makes everything as black & white for my dog as possible. To be as clear as possible my dog, I give him a balance of "yes you did something right", and "no, you did something wrong".
> 
> The thing I can never get a clear answer from people who never use physical corrections is, Why do you accept that dogs can take physical corrections perfectly fine from other dogs, but not from a human? If my male is irritating my female, she will snap at him, and he learns and moves on. His feelings are not hurt, he doesn't crumble and fall apart, he LEARNS not to do that. But somehow we have to act like dogs don't learn from corrections when it comes to training, and if you use them, you are just not competant enough to do an elaborate song and dance for the sake of using treats only.


 
Good point!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I rarely use treats. I do not hit, punch, kick, or jerk my dogs. I don't need to. I don't snap at my dogs because I am not a dog. They are smart enough to know I am not a dog. 

There is a thing about physical corrections, happens with kids not too sure about dogs. But you can't beat them to death (kids/dogs). There comes a point where your ability to dish out a physical correction is smaller than their ability to take it. If you rely on it, then what do you do then? You jerk the prong collar harder, stiffer, you yell louder, you kick the dog? 

If you do not need physical corrections to have a balanced, happy, compliant dog that does what you want when you want, why not. Because I do not yell at or hit my dogs, a simple change in tone is enough to get them to respond to something differently. They are not punishment-hardened. 

In a wild-dog pack, the packs that have the most trouble are those where the leader is not well-established. A good leader does not want to fight constantly and does not need to. He uses his eyes and body language to project to the lower ranking animals what he wants. And they take cues off of his confidence levels. If he is constantly warring with his pack, they will be injured and at some point he will be over-thrown and killed. That happens when you have dogs that are close in natural rank. But we are not dogs. We stand up straight, we use words, not growls and barks to communicate, we come and go, bring food, and we are not pack members at all. 

It is kind of like saying that people punch each other when they get angry, why wouldn't God do the same. Boys will be boys, and they fight with each other to get their way, why not let the teacher punch a few boys in the face to get his way? 

We are so on a different level than dogs that physical show of power should never be our method of controlling them. 

We own dogs, they are not our children. We train dogs and manage dogs, we do not do collective bargaining with them. Just because we choose to gain their trust and build a bond, and train with positive reinforcement rather than waiting for them to do the wrong thing and clobber them, does not mean we carry treats at all times, and do not understand the person-dog dynamics. The idea that the dog will only do what you want if you have a treat if you train positively is the biggest load of tosh when it comes to training myths.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

selzer said:


> I rarely use treats. I do not hit, punch, kick, or jerk my dogs. I don't need to. I don't snap at my dogs because I am not a dog. They are smart enough to know I am not a dog.
> 
> There is a thing about physical corrections, happens with kids not too sure about dogs. But you can't beat them to death (kids/dogs). There comes a point where your ability to dish out a physical correction is smaller than their ability to take it. If you rely on it, then what do you do then? You jerk the prong collar harder, stiffer, you yell louder, you kick the dog?
> 
> ...


I think you have an over exaggerated idea of what most (sane) people think are physical corrections. A slight tug on the collar, a small push to the side, that is the most I've ever done to a dog. I do not hit, I do not kick, I do not yank the leash hard enough to give the poor pup whiplash. You CAN give physical corrections without being abusive or over the top. 

When dogs correct each other they rarely actually hurt each other unless it is a serious fight. As such, physical corrections should not serious hurt a dog or cause lasting injury. If someone punches their dog, they are applying way more force than necessarily, which leads their dog to mistrust them and causes problems because they are being an unfair leader, a bully. Physical corrections are not meant to hurt the dog, they are meant to make it clear that the dog is doing something it's not supposed to do, and to break it's thought process and refocus its attention on us so it can learn what not to do. 

Teaching a dog without any physical corrections is possible, but it takes a lot longer. You are treating the dog like a child, instead of like a dog, and so it takes longer for the dog to understand what you want because you are expecting it to learn your language rather than speaking its language.

Dogs instinctually know what physical corrections are. Heck, they've been getting them since they were just little puppies playing with their litter mates. They are clear and they understand exactly what they are. It is faster because the dog doesn't have to learn the language because you are speaking its language. 

I certainly don't think that people punching each other in order to display their anger and frustration is an accurate comparison. We communicate primarily through vocalizations, not physical contact. To have something escalate into a physical fight is actually a failure to communicate effectively, because we do not instinctually talk to each other through touch. Dogs, however, do talk to each other through touch and so a nip from a says a whole lot more than a smack from someone. If you were standing next to someone and they suddenly smacked you, would you understand that it was because you were bothering them and invading their space? No, you would be completely confused as to why that person suddenly slapped you. A dog stands too close to another dog and it gets nipped, it understands and learns and doesn't do the same thing again. 

Dogs may be smart, but they are not humans. It is our job to go to their level instead of expecting them to reach ours. Because I don't care how smart your dog is, it is not on the same level as a human. It is hard sometimes to remember that they are just dogs when they do show very great intelligence, but as their leader we are supposed to make pleasing us as easy as possible, right? So that means communicating in the way the dog will understand the easiest. 

Which, to me, means using a combination of positive reinforcement and physical and verbal (not yelling, just a loud noise) corrections when they are doing something they're not supposed to be doing.


----------



## ShatteringGlass (Jun 1, 2006)

selzer said:


> I rarely use treats. I do not hit, punch, kick, or jerk my dogs. I don't need to. I don't snap at my dogs because I am not a dog. They are smart enough to know I am not a dog. .


Who's talking about punching and kicking their dog? That is abuse, not training with appropriate corrections. You don't snap because you're not a dog, but a snap IS a correction. A correction is getting the point across to your dog that what they did is wrong. Why can't people understand that a CORRECTION DOES NOT EQUAL ABUSE. Sometimes I may pinch my dog's tush to get his attention quick, that is a type of physical correction. Is that the same as kicking and punching?



selzer said:


> There is a thing about physical corrections, happens with kids not too sure about dogs. But you can't beat them to death (kids/dogs). There comes a point where your ability to dish out a physical correction is smaller than their ability to take it. If you rely on it, then what do you do then? You jerk the prong collar harder, stiffer, you yell louder, you kick the dog? .


Again, who is talking about beating their dog???? This is a training method thread, do you think anyone on this forum who uses corrections beats their dog???




selzer said:


> We own dogs, they are not our children. We train dogs and manage dogs, we do not do collective bargaining with them. Just because we choose to gain their trust and build a bond, and train with positive reinforcement rather than waiting for them to do the wrong thing and clobber them, does not mean we carry treats at all times, and do not understand the person-dog dynamics. The idea that the dog will only do what you want if you have a treat if you train positively is the biggest load of tosh when it comes to training myths.


Using corrections doesn't mean you don't teach the dog using motivation first before adding corrections. You don't just wait for your dog to make a mistake without knowing better and "clobber them" (again, you're talking about ABUSE, not corrections).

Sorry but I think it's dangerous how unfamiliar you are about a method of training, but have SO much to say about it.


----------



## GregK (Sep 4, 2006)

Chance&Reno said:


> she told me her husband had punched the dog in the face, kicked it in the testicles, and poked it in the eye when the dog would do something wrong. When that stopped working, he wanted the shock collar to escalate the corrections.


What a smoldering piece of crap this man is!!! 

:angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

BlackLite said:


> I guess that's why the call it a theory. I've never had the necessity to do it, since my current dog is a 2lb chihuahua. But like I said, I've spent years watching Cesar Millans show, and with a dog like a GSD, you need to show you are leader. Can this be achieved by doing obedience training with P+?


I've never done any of that "alpha" stuff with my GSD and she definitely knows I am the leader.
I don't think it matters if you're working with a 2 lbs Chi or 80 lbs GSD, they're all the same species and they learn the same way. The only difference I can see is it's easier to physically make a 2 lb dog do what you want than an 80 pound dog (which, in that case why would you want to make things physical with the 80 lbs dog in the first place?) Not that I think it's a good idea with a 2 lb dog either.

I also never understood people's reluctance with using treats as rewards, or saying "Well I would never use FOOD as a reward!" Food is a primary reinforcer, it's a very strongly reinforcing item, easy and fast to use so I don't get why so many people have a problem with using it in training.
It's a myth that a dog trained using food will only work for food, or will be food obsessed, steal food, etc... If you're training properly you phase out the food pretty quickly, just like you'd phase out using a training collar. If you're not training properly it really doesn't matter what tool you're using because it's probably not going to work that well anyway.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

AkariKuragi said:


> I think you have an over exaggerated idea of what most (sane) people think are physical corrections. A slight tug on the collar, a small push to the side, that is the most I've ever done to a dog. I do not hit, I do not kick, I do not yank the leash hard enough to give the poor pup whiplash. You CAN give physical corrections without being abusive or over the top. What you describe, a dog would not even consider a correction, a redirection maybe, and most positive trainers are ok with what you are describing if you are not talking about tugging on a correction collar.
> 
> When dogs correct each other they rarely actually hurt each other unless it is a serious fight. As such, physical corrections should not serious hurt a dog or cause lasting injury. If someone punches their dog, they are applying way more force than necessarily, which leads their dog to mistrust them and causes problems because they are being an unfair leader, a bully. Physical corrections are not meant to hurt the dog, they are meant to make it clear that the dog is doing something it's not supposed to do, and to break it's thought process and refocus its attention on us so it can learn what not to do. Why not just call the dog's name or say "EH!" and then direct the dog to something he can do? Why be physical at all. Totally unnecessary. If dogs are giving each other corrections, then they are close in rank, and an all-out fight is very possible.
> 
> ...


 If I use a loud noise, then I have lost my cool. Not good. I use a low tone to give a correction along with giving them the evil eye, "Don't even think about it, that's mine." No increase in the volume, just lower and perhaps slower than normal conversation.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

GregK said:


> The nonsense part would be that he's doing this due to 'dominance'.


True enough. He's doing it because... he can. We're working on that.  My slippers have become skates, it's all good. I never knew I could skate so well. :shocked:


----------



## GregK (Sep 4, 2006)

chelle said:


> My slippers have become skates,


What's this code for? :thinking:


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

ShatteringGlass said:


> Who's talking about punching and kicking their dog? That is abuse, not training with appropriate corrections. You don't snap because you're not a dog, but a snap IS a correction. A correction is getting the point across to your dog that what they did is wrong. Why can't people understand that a CORRECTION DOES NOT EQUAL ABUSE. Sometimes I may pinch my dog's tush to get his attention quick, that is a type of physical correction. Is that the same as kicking and punching?* By the time a dog snaps, that means he is ready to go farther if he must, if the other dog calls his bluff. Thinking that dogs should snap at other dogs to let them know what they don't like is a recipe for disaster. I correct my dogs verbally, when I need to. But that is usually just an Eh, and then we do it over, or I tell them what I do want them to do.  *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*I think it is amazing how few issues I have with my dogs seeing how I do everything wrong with them. *


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

GregK said:


> What's this code for? :thinking:


Haha, no code -- completely literal! 

I have a new dog in the house. He has learned to wait for release from the crate, but once he's all the way out, all I have to do is lean back and slide towards the door as he pulls like a sled-dog. My feet don't hardly even come off the ground. Oh sure, everyone thinks it's comical... except me!

We're working on this, but not doing too well as of yet. 

No. I'm not posting vid of my training failure. NO. :help::wild:


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

We're not saying what you're doing is wrong. Like I've said before, there are several different ways to get to where we want to go as far as training is concerned. You think that purely positive training is the way to go, and that's absolutely fine. Power to you. You are not hurting your dogs in the slightest, nor do I think you're doing a bad job raising them. I have seen it done many times, and if it works for you, great.

I do not use corrections to train my dogs. I do not yank on a collar to make a dog sit when it has never sat before. I do not shove a dog into a down when it has never learned the command. I guide the dog into the position I want with treats and reward with treats and lots of praise when they do the right thing. I do not use any corrections when I am training a dog.

The very word correction implies correcting a mistake, yeah? Primarily I only correct when I dog is doing something against the rules: chewing on things it's not supposed to (followed by offering an acceptable thing to chew on and then lots of praise), pulling on the leash while the dog is in heal (after learning what heal is, of course. I don't constantly yank on the leash when it has no idea what I'm asking from it), or exiting a command before I have given the okay. I give the level of correction that I think will be the most effective, not the highest level of correction possible. I use simple tugs and touches because they work and the dog responds to them. If a dog responds to something as a correction, even if you don't think it's strong enough to be a correction, it is still a correction.

But yes, I never use correction to teach dogs obedience commands, just to teach them what the boundaries are and once they know that I usually don't have to use remotely harsh corrections at all. The slightest pressure of the leash can bring them back from pulling instead of tugging because they know the boundaries now. 

So I don't think you're doing anything wrong, but I also don't think I'm doing anything wrong, because I sure as **** don't hurt my dogs. x3 But there are stupid people out there who do use corrections incorrectly and are too harsh, and it gives those of us who do use them properly a bad rep in the positive training only group.


----------



## GregK (Sep 4, 2006)

chelle said:


> No. I'm not posting vid of my training failure. NO. :help::wild:


Oh you must!! Then we will be able to give you pointers on how to solve this training issue.


----------



## Chance&Reno (Feb 21, 2012)

GregK said:


> What a smoldering piece of crap this man is!!!
> 
> :angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:


Trust me, it took ALL the self control I have to NOT pull that guy over the counter and do to him as he has done to his dog.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

AkariKuragi said:


> We're not saying what you're doing is wrong. Like I've said before, there are several different ways to get to where we want to go as far as training is concerned. You think that purely positive training is the way to go, and that's absolutely fine. Power to you. You are not hurting your dogs in the slightest, nor do I think you're doing a bad job raising them. I have seen it done many times, and if it works for you, great.
> 
> I do not use corrections to train my dogs. I do not yank on a collar to make a dog sit when it has never sat before. I do not shove a dog into a down when it has never learned the command. I guide the dog into the position I want with treats and reward with treats and lots of praise when they do the right thing. I do not use any corrections when I am training a dog.
> 
> ...


I am not purely positive, whatever that is. I use corrections. But my corrections are simply verbal. 

I use touch always as a positive thing.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

GregK said:


> Oh you must!! Then we will be able to give you pointers on how to solve this training issue.


Ok, I oblige. I purposefully chose the tamest dragging video. (Very sorry to go offtopic for this moment. If someone can get a laugh at my expense, it's worth it. )

Enjoy!

Tucker Drags Mom Tame Version-1/1 - YouTube


----------



## BlackLite (Mar 6, 2012)

What a debate this has turned out to be. I never hit my dog to current her. When I play with her, I roughhouse as much as you can roughhouse with a 2lb dog, and thats about it. When she does something wrong I just say no in a very stern voice. Other than that, we did her training at Petsmart classes, which is pretty much P+. However, I had a 4yo GR for about 2 weeks (had to give him back after it was given to me, owner missed him), and he had no walking manners at all. So, to correct it, every time he would pull I would jerk and release the leash and stop. He would usually snap out of the pulling, look back, and come back to my side. More often than not though, he didn't feel the jerk because the leash the owner gave me for him was like a chain link collar and leash in one kind of thing.. really odd, so it moved around a lot and was never like right on his neck, where it needed to be to effectively use jerk and release. But other than that instance, I almost never use physical corrections. Doesn't feel natural. I may use like a soft tap with the side of my leg or something to get his attention, but I will never like smack or punch a dog if it does something wrong.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

What an emotional topic!

And the words that real devotees of each approach add to that emotion.

For example - how many normal owners want to "Punish" their dogs for not doing the right behavior when they are told to? But "Correcting" him is ok, of course.

*Or even the oft heated debate that PO approaches may take longer and result in less reliable behavior* (before anyone takes serious umbridge with this - please realize I am taking this from one of Jean Donaldson's books in which she says "So what if a retrieve is less reliable taught with her method than one taught with compulsion?". 

Anyway an interesting debate! - I still am convinced that a good trainer should know different methods to teach different behaviors and for use on different dogs.

But i sure hope that no one thinks I am "cruel" and nasty to my own dog when I give him a tug on his leash when he doesn't do as he is told. Or that I am "spoiling" him when I ignore a little slip up, or worse even than that, when I laugh at him when he slips up and hops up on an old friend (he has been trained very often NOT to jump). But he is so cute sometimes!


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

Also keep in mind, punishment does not have to be physical, simply cutting off resources, ending something, ignoring, etc. 

I personally wouldn't use physical corrections with any of the shelter dogs I work with, that's just me. Dogs are opportunistic scavengers by nature, if something is rewarding to them they'll continue to do it. For some dogs it'll take them awhile to truly figure out how things work but most I've worked with pick up relatively quickly. Once you can effectively communicate with your dog and get to the point where they understand punishment and reinforcement it's fantastic.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

codmaster said:


> What an emotional topic!
> 
> And the words that real devotees of each approach add to that emotion.
> 
> ...


I think it's only emotional because everyone feels like their way is the best and if anyone does it differently they become defensive and feel like their way is being attacked, instead of being open minded to the ideas of other ways of doing things. Got a little like this myself, forgive me. x3

I personally don't view corrections (at least the ones I do) as punishment. Punishment seems to have a much more lasting effect than what I imagine corrections being. With a correction is like "No" then it's done with and we move on, and with punishment it's more like... "How could you do that you're so bad blah blah blah bam bam bam bad dog, etc" Corrections I guess are warnings and then punishment is what happens if you ignore the warnings, though I don't think I'd ever "punish" my dogs, other then sending them to their crate (calmly) in order to calm them down or fix whatever they got into. XD 

I also agree with knowing multiple methods for different dogs. The pole that bends is the one that doesn't break, right? Being flexible is a good thing, especially with the myriad of doggie personalities out there. 

And yes! XD We must remember that these are our pets (for the majority of us, anyways) and they shouldn't be expected to be robots. Just today I was trying to get Lei Lani to go into the beg position when I didn't have any treats on me and she got really excited and did a couple of hops but didn't stay in the position, then she stood up and when I told her to sit she turned and sat with her back against the couch so I couldn't give the proper hand signal to show that I'm really serious.  I totally cracked up because it was so obvious that she was trying to get out of doing it 'cause it's more difficult for her to maintain her balance.


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

That's where things get confusing sometimes, all the different person definitions xD 

For me, I'm more literal and go by the dictionary to an extent and consider "correction" and "punishment" synonymous. (They are in the dictionary, but I understand that can vary from person to person.) 

For me a warning would be verbal, varying intensity of the correction would make the variation. If that makes sense XD


----------



## ShatteringGlass (Jun 1, 2006)

selzer said:


> *I think it is amazing how few issues I have with my dogs seeing how I do everything wrong with them. *


Did I EVER say you where doing anything wrong? NO. I noted how little you know about how appropriate corrections are applied in training, since all you could talk about with the topic was punching, kicking, slapping, and beating a dog.


----------



## Witz (Feb 28, 2011)

I am exhausted reading another post on this subject and the inability of some to accept that every pup and dog is different as well as everyone's level of training experience. Use the whole tool box with the right information on it's proper application and it should work out just fine.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think there are a lot more variations in handlers then there are in the dogs themselves. Every single one of my dogs are different and every one I have ever owned has been different, but I am the same, me. And yet I have trained all of them with variations. I have managed all of them different in some ways. So, If I, one person, am different in my approaches to the many dogs I have had over the years, how much moreso is it that different people are different? 

I will say that as I have matured and my training methods have become more positive and less corrective/compulsive, it has gotten much easier overall, and I have more pleasure in training my dogs. Yes, dogs are different, and what works with one very well, might not work as well as another. The answer is not to revert to the old stand-by, but to find what works with this dog -- that is the challenge and what keeps training interesting and not a rote exercise.


----------



## Gretchen (Jan 20, 2011)

As a few have already said; respect, love and consistency. I do not believe in the "alpha" or hierarchy rituals. Dogs stopped becoming wolves 15,000-20,000 years ago when there somehow became a mutual agreement with dogs and humans to work together. So I don't know about the pack mentality.

As far as actual training methods go, it depends on the individual dog. My previous dog was so intuitive and obedient. If there were not leash laws, she would never need one. I used to laugh at people who had to take their dogs to training until I got our current one. She is very independent, high drive, protective. She needs her agility and obedience classes to challenge her brain. The method we've used the most is prong collar and positive reinforcements (but not always food). We also don't want to overwhelm her to the point that she looses her personality.

From what I've seen of Cesar Milan, he puts fear into the dogs and also exercises the heck out of them. What we see on TV are extreme cases, and maybe it works for them. But he is also training the owners, many have to change their attitude or drop their own fear.


----------



## AkariKuragi (Dec 19, 2011)

Gretchen said:


> As a few have already said; respect, love and consistency. I do not believe in the "alpha" or hierarchy rituals. Dogs stopped becoming wolves 15,000-20,000 years ago when there somehow became a mutual agreement with dogs and humans to work together. So I don't know about the pack mentality.
> 
> As far as actual training methods go, it depends on the individual dog. My previous dog was so intuitive and obedient. If there were not leash laws, she would never need one. I used to laugh at people who had to take their dogs to training until I got our current one. She is very independent, high drive, protective. She needs her agility and obedience classes to challenge her brain. The method we've used the most is prong collar and positive reinforcements (but not always food). We also don't want to overwhelm her to the point that she looses her personality.
> 
> From what I've seen of Cesar Milan, he puts fear into the dogs and also exercises the heck out of them. What we see on TV are extreme cases, and maybe it works for them. But he is also training the owners, many have to change their attitude or drop their own fear.


While dogs are no longer considered wolves, they do still live in packs. Have you ever seen a pack of feral dogs? And by feral, I don't mean some remote strain of wild dog that lives completely away from civilization. I mean stray dogs that roam human cities. Their ranks might not be as well defined as wolves, but they are still visible. Dogs do try to dominate each other all the time. The very thing that makes dogs such wonderful human companions is that they are pack animals, and that they become a part of our family, aka their pack. How much that comes into play when training them, however, is up for debate (as you can tell by this thread XD).

And as far as Cesar (finally, the correct spelling. XD Was too lazy to look it up), he does not put fear into dogs. If he did, he would likely get bitten very often. Whenever I see people going on about how bad of a trainer he is, and that he is too harsh on dogs and that he is just trying to dominate them by throwing his weight around... I wonder how much of his show they've actually seen. A lot of the dogs he works with are fear aggressive and unconfident. You do not see him alpha rolling these dogs (you really don't see him alpha rolling dogs in general. Like I said earlier, I've maybe seen it twice), you see him claiming the space, then when the dog stops reacting negatively to him (barking/being aggressive) he stops and lets the dog get used to him by standing there quietly, pretty much ignoring the dog so that it feels more comfortable. Is the dog stressed? Yes. Because the dog is in an uncomfortable situation. Do you think the dog is any less stressed when it is barking its head off trying to make itself look big and scary so that the thing it's afraid of stays away? No. And after a few minutes when the dog has been given time to relax and compute the situation, the dog relaxes. People see panting as a signal of stress, which it can be, but it can also be a sign of mental and physical tiredness. Which, when a dog is faced with a new situation and is not allowed to go to its normal reflexes for said situation and has to learn a new way to handle a situation, it is mentally tiring for the dog. Hence the panting. I'll also note that he rarely uses physical corrections on these dogs. I see more often verbal corrections, which are often enough because the dog is not terribly dominant because it is fearful and unconfident. 

The dogs you see him using physical corrections on are dogs that are confident enough to display actual dominance, particularly when they go after dogs on walks or in the home. And these corrections comprise of collar corrections, and tap corrections. Neither of which hurt the dog. He is patient and calm and never loses control of the situation. Not once have I ever seen him make a dog afraid of him through physical corrections. He makes them submissive, yes, but they are not cowering and avoiding him all the time. They will stand next to him, calm, alert, a bit tired from the mental and physical workout, but not fearful. The only dogs I have ever seen act fearful towards him are dogs that have fear issues to begin with.

He also doesn't "exercise the heck out of them" (although you might not have meant that negatively, to me it sounds as if you're implying he over exercises them). He exercises them a lot, but a lot of the problem dogs are breeds that are generally high energy and are not worked out enough, so they get bored and all riled up. I think he just provides them with the level of work out that they need. Exercise is an important part of a well balanced dog (unless it's a breed that doesn't really need more that a little ten minute walk up and down the block), and it's probably the #1 thing owners neglect with their dogs. A lot of people get dogs for the looks, but they don't necessarily want the fact that you have to walk them for three hours a day. Then they wonder why their dog barks incessantly, chews on everything, and digs holes in the yard. 

I'm not saying his methods are for everyone (which they really shouldn't be tried if you don't know what you're doing), but I do think people over react to them. Now, if you wanted to argue that his methods cause problems because stupid people watch his show, ignore the warnings at the beginning (and often repeated throughout the show), then go out and try to alpha roll their fearful dog every time it refuses to do something because they saw Cesar do it to a dog once, then yes, you have a point. But at that time I don't think it's fair to blame the trainer for other people's stupidity. : ( 

At the same time the same thing could be said for prong and e-collars. Before I came here I thought they were medieval devices, but I'd only ever seen them used incorrectly. Now that I've seen their proper use explained, they make much more sense and I think that they can actually be quite useful as a training tool.


----------



## ShatteringGlass (Jun 1, 2006)

good post, Akari.

I couldn't agree with you more


----------



## Cschmidt88 (Nov 24, 2010)

Gretchen said:


> As a few have already said; respect, love and consistency. I do not believe in the "alpha" or hierarchy rituals. Dogs stopped becoming wolves 15,000-20,000 years ago when there somehow became a mutual agreement with dogs and humans to work together. So I don't know about the pack mentality.
> 
> As far as actual training methods go, it depends on the individual dog. My previous dog was so intuitive and obedient. If there were not leash laws, she would never need one. I used to laugh at people who had to take their dogs to training until I got our current one. She is very independent, high drive, protective. She needs her agility and obedience classes to challenge her brain. The method we've used the most is prong collar and positive reinforcements (but not always food). We also don't want to overwhelm her to the point that she looses her personality.
> 
> From what I've seen of Cesar Milan, he puts fear into the dogs and also exercises the heck out of them. What we see on TV are extreme cases, and maybe it works for them. But he is also training the owners, many have to change their attitude or drop their own fear.



I agree, we could go into a whole debate on Cesar, but I find it's generally a waste breath. (generally speaking, not specific to anyone.) But indeed he does. 
Cesar Millan - The Dog Whisperer: Critics Answers

And yes I've watched quite a few episodes, used to be a big fan actually.


Feral dog packs are very loose nit packs, dogs can come and go as they please and considering they're scavengers it's not beneficial to the survival to form packs, that just makes more mouths to feed. Any dog can breed, which leads for little need for dominance, as the link explained.



> In animal behavior, dominance is defined as a relationship between individuals that is established through force, aggression and submission in order to establish priority access to all desired resources (food, the opposite sex, preferred resting spots, etc). A relationship is not established until one animal consistently defers to another.
> In species where strong hierarchies exist, this hierarchy is important evolutionarily because having a high rank confers a greater ability pass on one's genes.
> For instance, if you put four bulls or roosters together, they will fight and establish a rank order of 1 through 4. The highest-ranking bull or rooster will have access to the most females that are available for mating. The other males may have little chance or much lower chance to mate. In fact in the wild, for many species, most males never get the chance to mate.
> 
> ...


^From the link posted earlier.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Good Post Akari, many people who give advice on the forum or comment on other trainers, have only trained their own dogs and in limited venues. There is a BIG difference in training your dog and training other people's dogs. BIG!!! You have to be able to read dogs that you have not had the luxury of raising and understanding their foundation. Its not the tools in dog training that is bad....none of them....its the handlers or the application of the tools that is bad..... It is difficult to assess quality training based on appearance....Not impossible but certainly difficult for a novice. Now you can assess what you LIKE from appearance....but that doesn't mean its good or bad....maybe just not for you.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Selzer, no offense but how do you think your titled dog was trained for those SchH titles? "Purely positive"? I highly doubt it. So it's OK to buy dogs that someone else has trained with whatever methods they use as long as you're not involved?

My issue with how CM "trains" is not the physicality, honestly I don't care about the corrections or body-blocking or anything like that, but the actual psychology behind it...the flooding. I don't like that method whether it's "purely positive" or physical or whatever. If it works for him, fine, but I don't see any value in that technique with my own dogs and since I only train *my* dogs and he is mostly training other people's trainwrecks it stands to reason the picture is going to be quite different.


----------



## Phantom (May 9, 2013)

I believe these are all useful at some time. The way I understand them anyway. 

Positive Reinforcement: Something added after a behavior to help increase the probability that the specific behavior will occur in the future.
(A piece of ham after a sit, dog sits when told)

Negative Reinforcement: Something removed after a behavior to help increase the probability that the specific behavior will occur in the future.
(Leash is removed after sit, dog sits when told)

Positive Punishment: Something added after a behavior to help decrease the probability that the specific behavior will occur in the future.
(Nasty taste after chewing on furniture, dog stops chewing furniture.)

Negative punishment: Something removed after a behavior to help decrease the probability that a specific behavior will occur in the future 
(Person removed after playing too rough, dog stops playing too rough)


----------

