# Running dogwalk anyone?



## wildo

Yep- I really am _that_ inconsistent. I just can't make up my mind between running, stopped, or mixed contacts. On one hand- I've _never_ liked the idea of stopped contacts in a motion-based sport and even to this day, I think that if a GSD is to be competitive against other breeds in its class, then stopped contacts are not the way to go. On the other hand, there is little question that 2o2o (or any other stopped contact performance) offers the most control and more distance work potential (like "flips" into tunnels for example).

I'm beginning to think that if you can't get your dog to literally drive as fast as possible to the contact zone and _then_ stop, then you can't expect competitive times. When you see the dogs sprinting across the dogwalk but then slowing down to practically a crawl on the down side just to get into position- what's the point? Rachel Sanders in her Reliable Running A-Frame DVD states that when most handlers get into this situation, they don't even take the time to let the dog get into the 2o2o position before releasing them since they know they are losing time.

I found this article about running dogwalks that I thought was quite thought provoking: A Good Reason to Retrain to a Running Contact? | Running-Contacts.Com

Check out the comparison video here:


----------



## BlackPuppy

I like the running contact. My dogs do it easily, and they rarely miss the contact. I would have said _never_ missed a contact, but I think there were a couple of times. 

My dog club insists that the dogs must learn 2o2o, so I don't take their classes. I do most of my training alone. So far, it has worked with three dogs. 

I also don't like the way teeter is trained, but that's for another day.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

We use a running dogwalk- sort of. In class, he is to stop at the end (4on) until released. In a trial I release him so quickly, he doesn't actually stop. At first, I trained it as a running contact, but he was so inconsistent at a trial that I retrained him to stop and be released. This is reinforced in practice but he never actually has to stop at a trial. 
But, wow, after watching that video, I think I might change a few things. Though, the release is quick at a trial, I slow him down on the dogwalk to insure he gets both the up and down contact (they call both in USDAA). After watching videos from our trial this weekend, I thought I wanted to speed it up. I am going to work on it.

Thanks for sharing!


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

I'd rather lose a sec or so on the course with a 2on/2off, than lose an entire run from a flyoff.

Also have to mention that many AKC courses have an 'off course' directly in front of a contact obstacle so you not only have to manage your running contact but whatever the training is so your dog takes a hard left/right as they come off the yellow. Cause if they go straight ahead, at speed so you can't catch up, they'll be off and into/over the off course in a flash.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

BlackPuppy said:


> My dog club insists that the dogs must learn 2o2o, so I don't take their classes. I do most of my training alone. So far, it has worked with three dogs.


That's too bad, the best intructors/classes are more flexible and should be willing to work with you. Specially if you prove you are really training something with a method that is working. 

There ARE people with excellent running contacts, but it takes WAY more repetitive training then I am able to do. And the method used must be well understood by the trainer AND the dog so they really do ALWAYS run thru the yellow. Not just happen to step into it most (some?) of the time on the way down.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

MaggieRoseLee said:


> Also have to mention that many AKC courses have an 'off course' directly in front of a contact obstacle so you not only have to manage your running contact but whatever the training is so your dog takes a hard left/right as they come off the yellow. Cause if they go straight ahead, at speed so you can't catch up, they'll be off and into/over the off course in a flash.


NADAC is notorious for that too, especially having the dogwalk with an off course jump in front of it heading towards the start/finish line so the dogs think they're done. But, if you train it right, having a running contact doesn't have to mean "keep running straight ahead." That's one reason I train 4on with a release before a stop in the trial, but I really want to start letting him charge the dogwalk more.


----------



## gsdmom1

I stand by my 2o2o philosophy! A running dog walk IS VERY HARD and if you watch the dog in the video he is not driving to the bottom when she starts running it, he is moderate speed. YOU DO NOT NEED RUNNING CONTACTS TO BE COMPETITIVE. The dog that won the worlds last years DOES NOT HAVE RUNNING CONTACTS. Dogs begin to creep when handlers "muddy up the water". I did it. I am guilty. Let me put it to you the way I learned....
everytime you say sit and the dog's butt hits the floor they get a cookie. They do not get something for a half sit or a down, only a sit so...your dog will start to offer it as soon as they hear the cookie jar open, it is BLACK and WHITE to them. If you start rewarding them half sitting or downing when you say sit, you "muddy up the water". They were rewarded for so many different positions that it is now grey to them. This is what happens with contacts. we get to competition and nerves take over so we release early or we do not correct the dog for not doing the exact performance we trained. so....it is now grey. Watch these two videos....




notice how she drives to the bottome of the aframe and stops. I then release into tunnel.




18 mos later, letting her contacts go has resulted in this....she actually corrects herself because I stop and mark the behavior.

Running contacts are extremely hard to get. TRUE running. Think very hard befre attempting them. if your dog runs down but slightly jumps at the bottom, it is wrong, even if they are in the yellow. they have to stride completly and for a big shepherd, their natural stride might be over it.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

Love Tang's speed and drive!!



> 18 mos later, letting her contacts go has resulted in this....she actually corrects herself because I stop and mark the behavior.


Question, is she correcting herself or does she think the behavior is now- run off the contact and back up?


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO said:


> Love Tang's speed and drive!!
> 
> 
> 
> Question, is she correcting herself or does she think the behavior is now- run off the contact and back up?


I have had Bretta do the same thing when I stand there and don't move after she fails in her 2on/2off. The mere fact I am NOT moving and she doesn't get to reward HERSELF by us both running on is the actual 'correction'. It's marked by me NOT moving on and giving some kind of 'I'm very disappointed in you' comment. 

Sure Marisa will chime in with her thoughts though.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

Here are two recent videos. The first is how we train in class (sorry for the really poor video quality) the second is at a trial (just an FYI-this was a USDAA DAM tournament run- which means if you off course you get an E and it's really bad for your team- you can see I baby him up to the weaves and incur a refusal (2 pts I think in DAM- instead of an E) because so many dogs were taking the jump out there.)


----------



## gsdmom1

I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO said:


> Love Tang's speed and drive!!
> 
> 
> 
> Question, is she correcting herself or does she think the behavior is now- run off the contact and back up?


she goes back on because I stand there with my hands on my hips. normally she would just keep going. this is because I let her keep going when she did not do a 2o2o....i muddyed the water!


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

gsdmom1 said:


> she goes back on because I stand there with my hands on my hips. normally she would just keep going. this is because I let her keep going when she did not do a 2o2o....i muddyed the water!


I was just asking because someone I train with does 2o2o, but if her dog blows it, our trainer does not want her to just back up- because the behavior will eventually change to- "I run off, back up, put my feet on the contact, and get a treat."
I'm sure at the level you and MRL are, this doesn't happen, but I kind of wanted to ask for anyone starting out reading this.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

As far as saving time (or not) I made a GREAT video of Konnie and HER GSD on a run (with running contacts) and me on exactly the same course the same day with my 2on/2off. The point of the video isn't the contacts but watch it and then compare the times...





 
Fact is the dogs that beat both of us were probably BC's and beat us BOTH by as much as 20 sec!


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO said:


> I was just asking because someone I train with does 2o2o, but if her dog blows it, our trainer does not want her to just back up- because the behavior will eventually change to- "I run off, back up, put my feet on the contact, and get a treat."
> I'm sure at the level you and MRL are, this doesn't happen, but I kind of wanted to ask for anyone starting out reading this.


I am NOT asking Bretta to get back up on the contact, the fact she MAY is because she got her mistake. I'm not waiting there UNTIL she gets back up and on and 'into the position'. 

I AM waiting in one spot to 'mark' there was a mistake. Just running on, WHICH MOST PEOPLE DO AND THEN THAT MEANS THE DOG IS *REWARDED* FOR FAILING TO PAUSE, is the problem. People will ONLY run on after a flyoff at trials cause you know darn well IN CLASS you'd train thru it. 

So what we 'teach' a dog (only at a trial) is that they can run like maniacs and the rules are different! At a trial, if they don't do their 2on/2off cause they were so excited/happy/fast they get to run on excited/happy/fast. So we TEACH our dogs that at trials the rules are lax and different and the dogs have more control. While at home and in class they have to use their brains a bit more to work with mom/dad to get thru the course the fastest and most fun way. Then we handlers are stuck with issues that ONLY SHOW UP AT TRIALS! Startline stays for one!

At class when they run excited/happy/fast they have to get their contacts cause if they don't mom stops the world and trains back not allowing them to blast on.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

MRL, I think your point to the video is that 2o2o vs running contacts is not so much a time issue as taking the better/faster line for the whole course. Wide turns take a lot of time!


----------



## wildo

WOW! I didn't expect so many replies so quickly. I will have to wait until I get off work to read through this thoroughly. I do want to mention- I am positive that nobody training a running contact (on any obstacle) is oblivious to the fact that there is almost always an off course right after the contact. My inexperienced self says that this should not be a deciding factor for running contacts or not.

Let me put it this way: If you truly think that the immediate, straight on, off course obstacle is harder to negotiate because the dog is running fast in a running contact, then how do you justify that a 2o2o is "just as fast" as a running contact? If you are releasing your 2o2o the very instant the dog reaches position (or... reality check- well before the dog reaches position) then your dog has just as much speed to control while flipping into a tunnel or whatever.

I saw PLENTY of _very_ well trained 2o2o dogs take the off course at the trial last weekend. Many, many of them. Therefore, I reach the conclusion that the flip into a tunnel is JUST as difficult to train with 2o2o as it is a running contact- at least at speed.

Let me add to my questions-
For a nice fast 2o2o, don't you need to break it down into steps:
-nose targeting
-backchaining on equipment
-proofing
-increasing speed and drive
-etc...

In other words, it's not like 2o2o are trained with _few_ repetitions. Do you guys _really_ think that running contacts require "so many more" reps than 2o2o? I don't buy it. Not for competitive 2o2o's anyway.


----------



## wildo

I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO said:


> Love Tang's speed and drive!!


You and me both! But I don't think that's any secret. Hopefully someday I'll get to meet Tang. Not sure what I will say to her- perhaps something like: "Wow- you sure are an awesomely fast dog." lol... But yes- her desire and drive to do agility is my mental picture of what a GSD should look like doing agility. (In that, I will note that I am more impressed with what Tang does _between_ obstacles moreso than the obstacle performances themselves. Tang doesn't trot or gallop to each jump; Tang _sprints_ to each. And I love that.) She's my fav!


----------



## gsdmom1

Aww...thanks Willy! Tangy is super fun to train and run. I never get tired playing with my girl. Now I am training her daughter Rev! What a ball of energy!
You can meet Tangy anytime and give her a big hug. If you tug with her she might just follow you home!


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

I didn't know Tang was a Bonjon dog! I see Bonnie at trials a lot- KD is a great dog- are they related?


----------



## gsdmom1

Yes, Cadie is great! No, they are not related. Tangy is out of Bonnie's dog, Jessie. It was her one and only litter. Her sire is Ajax, and it was his one and only litter. Cadie is from Denise and Jerry Kiahaus.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

Oh okay, I've never met Jessie- must be a great dog too! Are you breeding Tang again?


----------



## wildo

This could help: http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/bloodlines-pedigrees/163224-help-tangs-pedigree-please.html


----------



## wildo

gsdmom1 said:


> If you tug with her she might just follow you home!


Given this: http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/agility/168403-running-someone-elses-dog.html I'd take her up on that! hehe!


----------



## wildo

Ok- back on topic. 



I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO said:


> In a trial I release him so quickly, he doesn't actually stop.


I think this is the crux of my issue with 2o2o. In the end, when I watch _any_ of the people running agility in the World competitions, there is *no* dog that could possibly overcome Newton's 1st law of motion and maintain position at the speeds they are running. So whether one would want to claim that they train 2o2o or not, I'm not buying that they are maintaining the 2o2o criteria at that level of competition (beyond, perhaps, the teeter). In all the very high level agility videos I can find on youtube- nobody is stopping their dog for 250 milliseconds to reinforce a motionless behavior. 

-Will Pimg ever be on the World team? :rofl:
-Is that any reason I shouldn't train _as if_ she could be on that team? ***** no.*

Quite honestly, I have a personal goal to be the fastest GSD at the trials I go to. Will we always? Nope. (Especially when Tang's around. :crazy But that's my goal. Getting Q's is super fun- and running a course "by the book in a decent time" is certainly rewarding. But nobody remembers those runs. It's nothing more than just another well trained dog running agility. I want to be _fast_. I want to run courses and have spectators look on in amazement; not because I'm some flashy guy or need the self gratifications or anything like that- but because to me, hearing people say stuff like this is more rewarding than any Q will ever be:
"Did you just see that big GSD make such a tight turn??"
"Did you just see those lightening fast contacts on that big GSD??"
"Wow- did you just see that GSD drive through those weave poles!?"
"I've never seen a GSD drive through an agility course like that!"

People expect that stuff out of Shelties and Border Collies. It is my opinion (could be wrong- don't think I am) that people do *not* expect that out of GSDs. I'd like to change their opinion. I simply can't imagine asking my dog to sprint as fast as possible around a course, but then come to a dead stop for fractions of a second just to assume a position (omitting the table).

Training is training, you know. In the end, the criteria is not _really_ the dog's position, but simply that one single paw touches that yellow. Beyond that, you "win" by speed. A stopped performance just doesn't make sense to me. I go through phases where I'd like for it to make sense, and I want it to make sense, but I'm having issues coming to grips with it _actually_ making sense.


----------



## wildo

And you know- I want to add:
I hope I'm making sense and asking the right questions. I can't imagine anyone who wants to get serious about agility doesn't ask themselves questions like this. For me, it seems natural to question the stopped contact... I'm hoping that by questioning it, I learn more about it and can come to an informed decision. Not just doing it because everyone else is. (Though I suppose that applies to running contacts as well.)


----------



## JakodaCD OA

ahhh willy, it's called being 'competative" LOL,,I think the agility bug has bitten you bad, as it should, Pimg is a fast girl and she' certainly can go all the way in my opinion.

I have expressed my views on running contacts, it's what worked for my long legged girl, when I was competing with her. However, she also knew when I said "TOUCH IT", that meant to touch those contact areas and slow down a bit in order to do that.

I never did 2o2o, I always started with target training, because I was seeing to many dogs that raced thru that 2o2o and go back and fix themselves, which then seemed to lead to "i missed the contact, i go back and hit it', and would turn into a 'normal thing' for the dog. (make sense?)

Teaching both, gave me the opportunity IF I needed it say, on a contact to front cross, or have just that few secs to gather myself or the dog, to change direction drastically IF I had to. 

I have no beef with anyone who wants to train whatever they want, or have their dog stop/wait on that contact , I just don't choose to for the reason you seem to not want to..The race And the game itself, sometimes to me it looks like training in the ring which again I have nothing against. But competative person I am, I went in there to Q, if I did GREAT, if I didn't, oh well, no big deal..

The top competators out there, go in to Q and to Place, don't let em fool ya when they say they don't..I've worked to many excellent rings, to see some pretty 'bad' behaviors from top competators when they don't..Just my 2cents


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

> Let me add to my questions-
> 
> For a nice fast 2o2o, don't you need to break it down into steps:
> 
> -nose targeting
> -backchaining on equipment
> -proofing
> -increasing speed and drive
> -etc...
> 
> In other words, it's not like 2o2o are trained with _few_ repetitions. Do you guys _really_ think that running contacts require "so many more" reps than 2o2o? I don't buy it. Not for competitive 2o2o's anyway.


I don't train with an actual target/nose touch. 

Both the 2on/2off AND the running contacts need to be trained. There needs to be a clear cut method. Clear to the handler AND the dog what exactly is being taught.

I have NO ISSUES with someone who trains a 'real' running contact. My issue is that most of the people I know that have running contact did NOT train with any particular method. Instead they have a dog that GENERALLy seems to run down and thru and GENERALLY hits their contacts. 

But there was no clear cut METHOD and training that was done. And most of these people have quite a few beautiful runs that were NQ'd due to a contact issue. 

It seems that when our dogs start in Novice, they are slower and hit their contacts. Then move up to Open and still hit most of their contacts. So everyone thinks their running contacts are working great (mostly  ).

Then they get into Excellent. And if they are doing well in training and getting their dogs to really love the sport and run, they are also getting a whole lot more whoohoo on the entire course, which bleeds onto the contact obstacles and the dogs leaping up and over dying to run on to the rest of the course. NQ.

So SUDDENLY the running contacts are an issue. The same running contacts that weren't 'trained'. There was no method or manner of training that can immediately be gone back to as a reminder. So these same handlers with these fast dogs are now BEGGING their dogs to slow from the start of a contact, tearing to the end to try to block the dogs descent, praying the judge didn't see because a toenail may have hit the yellow.

I personally don't want the judge to have to think. I want them to know my girls were in the contact.

I also feel that the fact I KNOW for sure, and have seen it all the time on the up contacts, that my dogs just naturally striding (not jumping or leaping) on the up contacts can go right from the earth over the yellow. I've seen it in one stride. So if I have seen it on the up, I know it can happen on the down, UNLESS the appropriate training has been done.



> I think this is the crux of my issue with 2o2o. In the end, when I watch _any_ of the people running agility in the World competitions, there is *no* dog that could possibly overcome Newton's 1st law of motion and maintain position at the speeds they are running. So whether one would want to claim that they train 2o2o or not, I'm not buying that they are maintaining the 2o2o criteria at that level of competition (beyond, perhaps, the teeter). In all the very high level agility videos I can find on youtube- nobody is stopping their dog for 250 milliseconds to reinforce a motionless behavior.


Hm... I think I may see some of your confusion with the 2on/2off. You are looking at that our dogs have to get into the position and then have to stay/stop.

That's not true and I think explains your mental block on this method.

I alway over hold my 2on/2off so it's very obvious. But the fact is all I really need is for my dog to have it's two front feet on the ground and 2 back on the contact. I'm NOT rewarding releasing for the STAY!

So you are confused that it's about the pause and the 'stay' and the losing time that is slowing the course time. 

And while sometimes we DO want a longer pause, to make a front cross, to make sure our dog doesn't have an off course, to wait for me to catch up cause I just fell................

WHAT WE WANT IS THE POSITION! Not the staying. So I can release (reward?) my dog for being in the 2on/2off for 30 sec. Or I can release/reward her the millisec I see her hit it. So many of the videos you are seeing of the top competitors ARE having their dog do a 2on/2off. But the dogs are getting a quick release as soon as the handler sees they got it.


----------



## AgileGSD

wildo said:


> Yep- I really am _that_ inconsistent. I just can't make up my mind between running, stopped, or mixed contacts. On one hand- I've _never_ liked the idea of stopped contacts in a motion-based sport...


 I have kinda always felt this way. The name of the game is speed - it's bad enough ya gotta stop at the table! It could that when I started doing agility, you didn't see stopped contacts so it didn't become part of my mental picture from early on. Of course, agility was different then all around - like there was this big weird obstacle called a "cross over":










And sway bridges weren't just for UKC:










So when people started training their dogs to stop in the yellow...I scoffed at the idea. Why in the world would I want my dog to stop in a game that's about speed? Pffft! I was accustomed to hoping for the best and too old to change my ways (I was in high school after all!). My first dog, a Dobe mix was not very fast and although he enjoy agility flying off was not a concern for him. My second dog was a Collie with moderate speed and he sometimes had contact issues but we struggled far more with weaves. Then came Jora...


"OMG I've never seen a such a fast GSD" Jora. She ran her contacts just fine for the first couple years...just long enough for me to start entering her in trials. She was fast and driven from the start and it was strongly encouraged that I teach a 2o2o on the contacts. Pffft! I wasn't slowing my speedy GSD down and anyways, she always hit her contacts. Always! Until she discovered it was faster to jump off of them. Then she rarely hit all of them, even at 9 years old. My best hope was to race her to the end (which made her go even faster LOL a real race!) and jump in front of the obstacle. I could get her to do contacts at training, although that took a long time to retrain. I could get her to do them at run thrus. But at trials - forget it! She was way too hyped up and would always resort to wanting to jump off except for the teeter. Had I known about and pursued actual running contact training, I think we would have been fine. The issue stemmed from lack of contact training and likely rewarding jumping off (the key to training RCs is to never reward for the dog jumping, even if they are in the yellow).

Sick of struggling with a talented dog who didn't touch yellow, I taught Jagger a stopped contact. He does a 4on contact on the a-frame and dogwalk. It causes him to slide down the aframe though which I don't like but eh, I didn't like Jora leaping off the top of the aframe either. He's pretty consistent though and only blows contacts if I try to encourage him to come down quicker (which he views as a release). Whimsy has a 2o2o that I am in the process of polishing up - I want it totally independent of me and fast to the bottom of the equipment. She's getting there! I sometimes regret not going with a trained running contact but I think she will have a very nice 2o2o when all is said and done. I don't find it practical to retrain it at this point and she's fast enough that it doesn't matter. Now I'm thinking I may train a running contact with Savvy. Some people just never learn 

Really though, I think a _trained_ contacted is key and beyond that running vs. stopped is just personal preference. Most dogs have inconsistent contacts because most have no or incomplete training for contacts. At least that is what I see around here.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

AgileGSD said:


> Really though, I think a _trained_ contacted is key and beyond that running vs. stopped is just personal preference. Most dogs have inconsistent contacts because most have no or incomplete training for contacts. At least that is what I see around here.


EXACTLY! That's exactly what I see. Bad 2on/2off (and good) AND bad running (and good) depending on how we train.

Thanks for sharing your experiences!


----------



## wildo

You know guys- this stemmed from me just renting Rachel Sanders' Reliable Running Contacts. She has an _actual, trained_ method, and it appeals to me. Don't know why... but that DVD is superb. For what it's worth, I agree with all of you about a _trained_ running contact vs a "natural stride" or "hope for the best" running contact. That's what I have now, and it just isn't working.

My mind says I will pick the contact type that I find to be fastest (running) and actually _train_ that contact type. Pimg's my first dog, I might as well "go for the glory" and learn my lessons with her. Who knows- perhaps trained running contacts will just not work at all- or maybe they will make her very fast. I think it's worth a shot. I'm young. Kind of.


----------



## gsdmom1

Will....all I am saying is to have true running is that the dog maintains the same speed up as it does down running right through. that is EXTREMELY hard to get. Most of the time dogs will run and then slow down in the contact waiting for a release. that is not true running. 
Give it a go! Would love to see results.

BTW...I tried running the aframe with Tang's pup and her natural striding goes right over the yellow. So, 2o2o for her. I do not want to break her natural striding. 

I am working contacts with her right now. I will video how the process works for me if you are interested.


----------



## wildo

I'm ALWAYS interested to see how others are doing it. I do think I will give Rachel Sanders' method a shot. I just ordered the 3way PVC sections I need to build her box.

Come to think of it, MartinisRanch on youtube has a "basics of the Sanders' method" clip here:










This is more/less the method I plan on attempting.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> Will....all I am saying is to have true running is that the dog maintains the same speed up as it does down running right through. that is EXTREMELY hard to get. Most of the time dogs will run and then slow down in the contact waiting for a release. that is not true running.
> Give it a go! Would love to see results.


This thread made me realize I don't actually have running contacts, lol. I used to train running with a target on the ground, but had a lot of flyoffs in trials. I switched to 4on, which I guess assumed was running since in trials the release is so quick he doesn't stop, but I realize that's not the case. 

True running contacts do seem really hard to train. If you don't have luck with them, and don't want 2o2o, try 4o.


----------



## wildo

I do have to admit, I found it odd that she used a different method, "natural stride" you might call it, to train her running dogwalk:





In my head, I don't see why you couldn't use the box method for a running dogwalk. With an A-Frame though, there isn't really a concept of a natural stride since the A-Frame requires collection by nature. I'm not sure what to make of that. Anyone have any idea why you couldn't use the box method (Sanders method) to shape a running dogwalk?


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

> With an A-Frame though, there isn't really a concept of a natural stride since the A-Frame requires collection by nature.


I'm not sure what you mean by this. Dogs do have a natural stride with the a-frame, ex. some dogs' natural stride will carry them up and over the top (not touching the top), landing on the other side.


----------



## wildo

The Rachel Sanders method does not care about striding rather it cares about what she calls "hits," the number of times _both_ the front and rear feet hit the _down_ side of the a-frame. She strives for a 2-hit performance in all but the smallest dogs which she'll allow a 3-hit performance.

She does mention the importance of the apex stride, specifically in the way that the dog clears the apex. The dog shouldn't be supporting itself by placing a front or rear foot down while clearing the apex. The dog should be flying over and landing nearly halfway between the apex and the top of the contact zone.

Since our GSDs will have a "natural" stride of well over 6', there is no way they will be hitting the contact zone while landing 3' down from the apex (leaving 6' of frame left). The dog's natural stride should easily clear that remaining 6'. Therefore, it is not good enough to rely on a "natural stride" to get a running a-frame. The dog needs to learn to collect as it completes its apex stride so that it can then perform a 2-hit downside performance.


----------



## I_LOVE_MY_MIKKO

Ah, got it! I misread and thought you meant she was saying dogs don't have a natural stride over the a-frame. Thanks for clarifying!


----------



## wildo

Great! No problem. 

...And that's what I mean about the dogwalk. If the dog can learn to collect enough to be able to get two strides on the 9' a-frame section, then I think the dog should also be able to adjust its stride properly to be able to get two strides on the 12' dogwalk down section. I'm not seeing why there should be a huge difference between how the two obstacles are trained for running performances. Perhaps there is a good reason...


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

gsdmom1 said:


> I am working contacts with her right now. I will video how the process works for me if you are interested.


Marisa, I know I'd love to see updates and video as you train... huge help for us all. :wub:


----------



## AgileGSD

wildo said:


> I do have to admit, I found it odd that she used a different method, "natural stride" you might call it, to train her running dogwalk:
> In my head, I don't see why you couldn't use the box method for a running dogwalk. With an A-Frame though, there isn't really a concept of a natural stride since the A-Frame requires collection by nature. I'm not sure what to make of that. Anyone have any idea why you couldn't use the box method (Sanders method) to shape a running dogwalk?


 This seems like some variation of Silvia Trkman's RC method, which is very much based on the DW. It could be she just wanted to try both? Silvia's method is based in teaching the dogs to run vs. jump on the down ramp. Most dogs fly off due to jumping vs. running on the down ramp. 

Info on her method:

http://silvia.trkman.net/cone.htm

And 27 pages of discussion with videos with her answering questions and critiquing progress. This can really help you understand this method.

http://www.lolabuland.com/our-training/running-contacts-2/comment-page-1/#comments


----------



## wildo

Awesome! I can't wait to read through that info! For what it's worth, I did find this site: Running Contact Training Resources for Dog Agility Competitors that mentions both the Sanders and Trkman methods. In fact, I recall a couple articles I read on there about people using the Sanders method for the a-frame and Trkman method for the dogwalk. I don't know much about Trkman's method, so it makes sense I didn't recognize it.

I also asked my instructor about running vs stopped contacts and why she choose to train stopped. Her wonderfully colorful response was that she "was too old and slow to get her fat ass in place for running contacts." LOL! She continued that she felt the 2o2o offered an "exact position" for the dog to learn which made it much easier to train. She also said that she "would _never_ discourage someone from attempting to train a running contact" and agreed that *if* I am consistent and diligent in training, Pimg may respond better to the running contact than stopped.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

wildo said:


> Awesome! I can't wait to read through that info! For what it's worth, I did find this site: Running Contact Training Resources for Dog Agility Competitors that mentions both the Sanders and Trkman methods. In fact, I recall a couple articles I read on there about people using the Sanders method for the a-frame and Trkman method for the dogwalk. I don't know much about Trkman's method, so it makes sense I didn't recognize it.
> 
> *I also asked my instructor about running vs stopped contacts and why she choose to train stopped. Her wonderfully colorful response was that she "was too old and slow to get her fat ass in place for running contacts." LOL! She continued that she felt the 2o2o offered an "exact position" for the dog to learn which made it much easier to train. She also said that she "would never discourage someone from attempting to train a running contact" and agreed that if I am consistent and diligent in training, Pimg may respond better to the running contact than stopped*.


There ya go! 

Good luck with whatever you decide. :wub:


----------



## AgileGSD

wildo said:


> Awesome! I can't wait to read through that info! For what it's worth, I did find this site: Running Contact Training Resources for Dog Agility Competitors that mentions both the Sanders and Trkman methods. In fact, I recall a couple articles I read on there about people using the Sanders method for the a-frame and Trkman method for the dogwalk. I don't know much about Trkman's method, so it makes sense I didn't recognize it.


 I think those are the two main methods for the most part. I like Trkman's method because it doesn't require much in the way of props. I will likely be doing a RC with Savvy and will use her method (it's certainly PyrShep approved LOL). 

It's great that your instructor is so open minded!


----------



## gsdmom1

Well, here is one for you guys. I am thinking about teaching Rev to lay down on the teeter and ride it down. (run to the edge and drop her body into a down and stay there while it tips until I release). I am interested to see if this will change her 2o2o on the dogwalk.....


----------



## wildo

gsdmom1 said:


> Well, here is one for you guys. I am thinking about teaching Rev to lay down on the teeter and ride it down. (run to the edge and drop her body into a down and stay there while it tips until I release).


Like this?








Shaping Success: Buzzy Clips - YouTube <-- source.

I think it will be very effective. That is one of the items on my winter training list.


----------

