# What do y'all think about pinning/alpha roll



## Heagler870 (Jun 27, 2009)

I have heard some people hate it and some people love it, or at least think it's a natural training method. I have never done this physically to my dogs but my pup Riley will submissivly roll on his back when I give him the "You're in trouble look." I used to get on the floor and play with him and that's when he started doing it. It would be when I would love on him and put my face around his neck. That's when he would automatically do it. Now he just does it if I give him a certain look, or when I give him a good ole belly rub! What is your opinion of people who purposfully incorporate "Pinning" or the "Alpha roll" for training?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

This thread is the same as your question. It was a fun read!
http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/general-behavior/141303-alpharoll-mistake.html


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

i've never alpha rolled a dog. my dog will jump
on the bed with us and roll on back but that means
rub him.


----------



## Heagler870 (Jun 27, 2009)

Oh, sorry!! I guess I should start searching before I post. I forum on another site and it's NO WHERE as big as this one. I forget. Sorry.


----------



## Heagler870 (Jun 27, 2009)

Oh, and thank you!


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Don't be sorry, I just remembered that thread, and how you play with your pup...alpha rolls, zerbits and rasberries~what more could a pup want!!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

You might consider toning your reproaches to your pup down a bit. If the dog is giving you the "I submit, please don't kill me" language, it could be you have a very soft/submissive dog. 

I find that soft dogs need very little corrections, and stiff corrections can move you backwards instead of forwards. 

Just thinking out loud here.

Soft dogs can be the most excellent pets because generally they want to please you and when they know what they should not do, they NEVER do it. But they require someone willing to encourage and build their confidence moreso than discourage behaviors.


----------



## fgshepherd (Sep 1, 2010)

Wow, that was a lot of information in that post. I've never rolled my dog over. He is getting closer and closer to rolling over on his back for me to pet his belly, but it is his doing, not mine. I'm not brave enought to try to force him! Plus, when it's his idea, it seems like he's doing it out of respect for me instead of fear of me.


----------



## JKlatsky (Apr 21, 2007)

Generally Alpha Rolling is stupid. First, because usually people use alpha rolling to get their dog/puppy to "submit" to their "dominance". I think this is taking advantage of a dog that is already willing to submit without needing to be physically forced to it. So basically alpha rolling is just bullying.

I mean really. Go ahead and try to alpha roll a 90lb male that really is bent on showing you who's boss. Let me know how your face fares in that encounter. 

If you actually have a dog that wants to dominate you that you need to show superiority over...well then you probably need to be a very experienced handler or you need some serious professional training. Most dogs really don't want to challenge your authority to that level.

ETA- I do flip my dogs over on their back for belly rubs and for general handling purposes. I like to be able to mess with their belly for different reasons such as medical, etc. However, they are never struggling against it, it's always a calm pleasant thing that they allow because they trust me NOT to make them uncomfortable.


----------



## Hunther's Dad (Mar 13, 2010)

My signature says it all.


----------



## just another truck (Jun 7, 2010)

I have alway heard of an Alpha roll, not sure the when or where you are supposed to use it.

I have always been able to roll my pups over, with out issue, hold them down, and give them Love with out any fight.. I have wrestled them down playfully. So, I dont know.


----------



## Kelly's Buddy (Nov 15, 2010)

JKlatsky said:


> Generally Alpha Rolling is stupid. First, because usually people use alpha rolling to get their dog/puppy to "submit" to their "dominance". I think this is taking advantage of a dog that is already willing to submit without needing to be physically forced to it. So basically alpha rolling is just bullying.
> 
> I mean really. Go ahead and try to alpha roll a 90lb male that really is bent on showing you who's boss. Let me know how your face fares in that encounter.
> 
> ...


:thumbup:


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

fgshepherd said:


> He is getting closer and closer to rolling over on his back for me to pet his belly, but it is his doing, not mine. I'm not brave enought to try to force him! Plus, when it's his idea, it seems like he's doing it out of respect for me instead of fear of me.


There ya go! He's comfortable putting himself in a submissive position with you, so I'd say you're doing a good job building trust. 

I think alpha rolls are ridiculous btw...unless you're a wolf.


----------



## London's Mom (Aug 19, 2009)

I would never alpha-roll my dogs. If I need them to "behave" in public or when I have company, I will use the Down-Stay command.  They both feel comfortable with that command and it seems to calm them when they are in a stressful situation.

Although, with that said, both of my dogs will "offer" me their bellies for a good rub down!


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

Whoever thought of this as a training method is a ding-dong. If you look at wolf behavior in the wild, the dog that is being submissive is not ever being forced. It is always on its own accord. Many people who do this method (that I've seen) force their dog on its back. In my opinion, this just makes for a very unconfident dog.

Ozzy rolls on his back for me and I rub my face in his fluff and give him tummy rubs.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I would suggest that if you are going to "alpha roll" a GSD then either he/she should be very young and small OR you had better be very physically strong enough and know what you are doing as it could get very tense very quickly depending on the dog and his/her personality and your relationship with them.

on the other hand, i have had to get physical with my dogs on a couple of occasions (back when I was younger and more brave (foolish). Once when my then 10/11 mo male GSD (from one of the toughest male GSD German imports decided that he didn't want to give up his real bone that I had given him and showed his teeth and made a really nasty growl when I reached for it. Without thinking of the consequences, I grabbed him by the scruff of the neck and gave him a very low "NO" and a shake. He accepted it and never again decided that I could not take something out of his mouth. Second time was when I threw a toy for my two female GSD's to chase and the younger one got it first and the older decided that she wanted it and jumped on the younger one and it was on! I grabbed both by the scruff of their respective necks and told them to stop it and by some miracle I was unscathed - could have gotten bit by both of them I realized later but it turned out ok. I was lucky!

But I often wonder what would have happened if i had backed off from my young male GSD when he growled??


----------



## ken k (Apr 3, 2006)

Alpha roll is old technology, like posted above, a "down stay" will accomplish the same thing, when my 3 start acting up they hear a firm down stay and they know their in trouble


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

I think that if you try to force a large dog down like that, someone could get hurt. The only way I could think of getting a big dog down that doesn't want to go down is to knock its legs out from under it, and that would make it land on its side, and that could potentially hurt it. Or you could get hurt for obvious reasons.


----------



## Denali Girl (Nov 20, 2010)

I guess I'm not going to knock it cause I don't know enough about it. I guess wolves do this in the wild or something? That's cool and I guess it would work if I were raising a wolf but I have a GSD so I'll stick to what I know.


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

Denali Girl said:


> I guess I'm not going to knock it cause I don't know enough about it. *I guess wolves do this in the wild or something?* That's cool and I guess it would work if I were raising a wolf but I have a GSD so I'll stick to what I know.


But watch their behavior. You will never see a wolf FORCE another on its back. The submissive one always does so on its own.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

codmaster said:


> on the other hand, i have had to get physical with my dogs on a couple of occasions (back when I was younger and more brave (foolish). Once when my then 10/11 mo male GSD (from one of the toughest male GSD German imports decided that he didn't want to give up his real bone that I had given him and showed his teeth and made a really nasty growl when I reached for it. Without thinking of the consequences, I grabbed him by the scruff of the neck and gave him a very low "NO" and a shake. He accepted it and never again decided that I could not take something out of his mouth. Second time was when I threw a toy for my two female GSD's to chase and the younger one got it first and the older decided that she wanted it and jumped on the younger one and it was on! I grabbed both by the scruff of their respective necks and told them to stop it and by some miracle I was unscathed - could have gotten bit by both of them I realized later but it turned out ok. I was lucky!
> 
> But I often wonder what would have happened if i had backed off from my young male GSD when he growled??


Jax started the same thing when he was 15ish weeks old. It was adorable and hilarious because he was actually saying "bow wow!" in his little puppy voice... then it got concerning and I decided it was going to stop. It took a few rolls but he got the hint (I still miss the adorable "bow wow" though )


----------



## Ucdcrush (Mar 22, 2004)

When I have seen Cesar do it (and his show is probably what has people talking about it more recently), he usually does it to a point where the dog exhales like a sense of relief. From being a human and watching it, it's as if the dog has accepted that what he thought was so terrible (a human, another dog, etc.) is, in fact something he can live with, because there is a CALM ASSERTIVE human who is holding him calmly in that position. And he is not dying, the person is not freaking, etc.

Here is a video where he does it and talks about it:


----------



## beowolf (Sep 3, 2010)

Heagler870 said:


> I have heard some people hate it and some people love it, or at least think it's a natural training method. I have never done this physically to my dogs but my pup Riley will submissivly roll on his back when I give him the "You're in trouble look." I used to get on the floor and play with him and that's when he started doing it. It would be when I would love on him and put my face around his neck. That's when he would automatically do it. Now he just does it if I give him a certain look, or when I give him a good ole belly rub! What is your opinion of people who purposfully incorporate "Pinning" or the "Alpha roll" for training?


I don't recommend this with large breed dogs. I'm not a professional trainer, but as someone whose owned dogs for 30+ years, I know better than to try and pin a 100 pound dog down to the ground while staring in it's eyes making the dog think I've gone crazy. The dog will react to this unusual behavior, and it may not be friendly, even if he loves you. 

You want to assert your dominance over your dog, let him go a day without eating. Remind him whose hand feeds him. You'll get more mileage out of doing that than you will trying to WWF your dog.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

I think that scruffing is appropriate for severe offenses, and pinning or forcefully restraining a dog can be very effective, particularly with younger pups. But you have to use it with consideration, both in type and strength, and you have to use it precisely, and you have to use it predictably. And that's with what I would consider a 'normal' dog -- not an insanely reactive one like the dog in the above video. 

But the important thing is that significant physical punishment shouldn't be used unless it's the only recourse due to practical constraints (the dog has to learn its lesson NOW or it's in/being a danger) or because you've exhausted the reasonable other options. You also have to mark it properly so that the dog understands that punishment will come when it performs this action, but learns that punishment only comes when it has been marked, and so gets a chance to check its action. 

I think that the age of the dog also matters significantly. Pups usually respond pretty well to a stern voice and restraint: grabbing them by the nape of the neck and forcing them down or away and holding them immobile works particularly well, since they're used to getting mouthed like this by their mom. However, if the dog was reactive and older, or particularly handler-sensitive, or a host of other things, I wouldn't feel comfortable doing this, and would probably prefer an e-collar or something similar. But puppies? Works just fine. Immediately rewarding them for calming down/submitting/relenting also helps reinforce the lesson and reinforce that while engaging in a behavior brings a negative stimulus, not engaging in it brings a positive one -and- the cessation of the negative stimulus.

Also, in this case, I'm not entirely sure that 'punishment' is what's happening here -- forced habituation is more like it. Caesar actually uses quite a few behavioral techniques that seem sort of ridiculous to laypeople. One of these is that it's hard to maintain a conditioned response if you're not allowed to actually perform that response. This shows both at the point where he moves the dog's tail out from between its legs and when he pins the dog down and doesn't let it move. The dog learns that a: what it's doing isn't working, b: this guy isn't doing anything that's actually hurting me, and (hopefully) c: god, this is exhausting, if he does this every time I do that, I'll just sit there instead. Also, by not letting the dog get all hyped up and engage in the behaviors its been engaging in, it helps wind the dog down.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

And how many times has he been bit? How many people have been bit because of him showing his alpha roll? 

Last I heard he was backing off promoting the alpha roll per his *talks* with the American Humane Association. For those who do not know the AHA is the group that monitors the care and treatment of animals during TV and movie making. They and CM have had clashes when he has refused any of their representatives on location while he tapes his shows. 

Read the "Quotes from Experts"
*Talk Softly and Carry a Carrot or a Big Stick?
*By Jean Donaldson, Director of The SF/SPCA Academy for Dog Trainers
Here you will see what many of the world's experts think of CM.
Modern Dog Training vs. Cesar Millan

_Just a few partial quotes from the article:_

_We’ve written to National Geographic Channel and told them they have put dog training back 20 years.”_
Dr. Nicholas Dodman - Professor and Head, Section of Animal Behavior
Director of Behavior Clinic, Tufts University - Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine

_"To co-opt a word like ‘whispering’ for arcane, violent and technically unsound practice is unconscionable.”
_Jean Donaldson, The San Francisco SPCA-Director of The Academy for Dog Trainers

_"Many of the techniques he encourages the public to try are dangerous, and not good for dogs or our relationships with them ."_
Dr. Suzanne Hetts, Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist, Co-owner of Animal Behavior Associates, Inc., Littleton, CO


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

beowolf said:


> You want to assert your dominance over your dog, let him go a day without eating. Remind him whose hand feeds him. You'll get more mileage out of doing that than you will trying to WWF your dog.


Eeh. I'm not sure that you could count on all dogs to learn the lesson. Possibly not even most dogs.

I think the problem with alpha-rolling and other restraint-based discipline comes when you're dealing with a hyped up dog who's never encountered anything similar before. If a dog is used to engaging in roughhouse physical play with its owner, being rolled isn't something that's new to it, and it may actually see the initial rolling as play, or at least have the thought that being approached like that isn't going to lead to pain. It's when they get restrained that they'd get annoyed.  

If, on the other hand, they're raised by an owner who believes that hugging/wrestling/push-em-around-and-bowl-em-over play is inappropriate or who simply never engages in it, (like an owner with a dog they can't even stand to be near,) then the dog is suddenly being aggressed upon and dominated. It doesn't have a learned frame of reference for this stimulus -- it has never associated a strong physical advance and manipulation by its owner with 'play' since it was a young puppy -- and has to fall back on instincts, which would include fear and could lead down the path to a bad bite.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

ILGHAUS said:


> _"Many of the techniques he encourages the public to try are dangerous, and not good for dogs or our relationships with them ."_
> Dr. Suzanne Hetts, Certified Applied Animal Behaviorist, Co-owner of Animal Behavior Associates, Inc., Littleton, CO


I think that this is the real reason why people shouldn't be advised to do things like an alpha roll. It's not that they don't work. It's not even that they're necessarily hard to execute, or that, if done correctly, they cause some sort of psychological damage to the dog. But people tend to -suck- at applying punishments like this, don't understand -how- to apply them, don't understand when to release them, and use them for things that don't deserve this level of response or think that the objective is to cause the dog pain. Oh, and they have no clue how to tell that it'd be stupid for them to even try this with a certain dog because it'll get their face bitten off.


----------



## beowolf (Sep 3, 2010)

Tropism said:


> Eeh. I'm not sure that you could count on all dogs to learn the lesson. Possibly not even most dogs.


I'm only counting on my dog learning the lesson.
If you have a dog that doesn't understand, then your role as pack leader isn't firmly established with your dog. Part of being a pack leader is being a food source. If your dog is unsure about where it's food comes from, you're heading down a slippery slope. I want my dog to ALWAYS understand that I'm not only his source of food, I'm the source of his lack of food. I'm the pack leader.


----------



## Denali Girl (Nov 20, 2010)

Konotashi said:


> But watch their behavior. You will never see a wolf FORCE another on its back. The submissive one always does so on its own.


 
Yes I agree with you. When my pup gets with her sister she approaches her with her head down low and ears back, it's neat to realy watch them and how they interact. The last time they got together my dog did something to her sister and the sister let out such a growl and showed her teeth and my dog went right to her back lol. My friend and his wife started running toward them because they thought they were fighting but they weren't, they got back up and started playing ball.


----------



## ayoitzrimz (Apr 14, 2010)

Just my 2 cents:
I would never alpha roll my dog and would never recommend to anyone to do it. Just like people have posted this is NOT a natural behavior in wolves as previously thought. Actually, this position is GIVEN by the submissive dog rather than FORCED upon. Am I positive training, clicker type of person? Not at all! I do correct my dog and use touch as well leash corrections as necessary. I've also established rules that my dog KNOWS must be kept. With that said, I do reward him generously with play when he does the wanted behavior and train him daily (in Schutzhund). Bottom line is this: Both corrections and rewards are necessary in educating a dog (in my opinion) but bullying a dog into submission can lead to a dog who's afraid of touch at best and a bite to the face at worse. There are better ways to be a leader. 
I do, however, understand that alpha rolling is a method that works _when done correctly_ but 99% of the population simply cannot perform it correctly (that includes myself). The Monks of New Skete, who popularized the alpha roll confessed in the second edition of their most famous book that they wished they'd never recommended the technique.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I would also never try a roll on our dog. he will however roll himself over when he wants a belly rub - almost every morning when i let him out of his crate he will try one. Then often when I am rubbing his belly he is obviously not cowed (or terribly submissive) as he will often try to grab my hand with his mouth!. Not a bite just a mouth - he has always been mouthy ever since he was a little puppy.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

ILGHAUS said:


> And how many times has he been bit? How many people have been bit because of him showing his alpha roll?
> 
> Last I heard he was backing off promoting the alpha roll per his *talks* with the American Humane Association. For those who do not know the AHA is the group that monitors the care and treatment of animals during TV and movie making. They and CM have had clashes when he has refused any of their representatives on location while he tapes his shows.
> 
> ...


And we should probably also count the number of dogs that were headed for the needle before he came across them, you think?

And it sounds like the folks that you have quoted are definetly "Positive only" advocates whom would of course be violently opposed to anything like Cesars approach just on principle alone. 

And then throw in a little professional jealosy at his wide audience and you have a really good reason to oppose Cesar or at least that is my reasoning.

Maybe it would be good to see the violent aggressive dogs that the above spokesmen opposing Cesar's methods have actually rehabilitated?


----------



## shannonrae (Sep 9, 2010)

codmaster said:


> And we should probably also count the number of dogs that were headed for the needle before he came across them, you think?
> 
> Maybe it would be good to see the violent aggressive dogs that the above spokesmen opposing Cesar's methods have actually rehabilitated?


Indeed!

I will alpha roll one of my dogs if needed. Only in situations where the dog is to overstimulated to obey commands. 
My first GSD (rescue) was very dog aggressive. Even from a distance he would attempt to pull me over to the "offending" dog and try to attack (and he did mean business). He got rolled a couple of times, but he figured out quickly that if he sat and did not lunge/growl/act like an idiot that he would save himself embarrassment. It was no time at all before he realized he did not need to go into attack mode and that some friendly (or in his case tolerated) sniffing was not such a bad thing. I do not believe it damaged our relationship in the least. Bear trusted me completely and would let me do anything I wanted to him until the day he died.
This method is not for every dog or owner and should not be attempted by everyone. I only do it with dogs I have a relationship with and trust, and have never been bitten by any of them. 
If you are going to use an alpha roll as a training aid it is important to show the dog what he can do to avoid a roll. And a roll should be used only in situations where the dog is attempting to cause harm.


----------



## ayoitzrimz (Apr 14, 2010)

codmaster said:


> And we should probably also count the number of dogs that were headed for the needle before he came across them, you think?
> 
> And it sounds like the folks that you have quoted are definetly "Positive only" advocates whom would of course be violently opposed to anything like Cesars approach just on principle alone.
> 
> ...


Very well said! I stand corrected on my previous post. Sometimes, when done by a professional, an alpha roll will produce good results. If I had to choose between alpha rolling an aggressive dog (if I was a professional) or dumping him in the shelter or worse... I would ALWAYS choose to do what I can to rehabilitate the dog. IF that means alpha rolling and dominating him, I'm sure he would make the same choice if he knew the alternative.

P.S. yes, Jean Donaldson is a positive clicker only advocate and yes, I'd love to see a head count of the number of dogs she rehabilitated vs. Cesar. BUT Cesar is a professional, and I simply think there are better ways to correct a dog than alpha roll him for the average dog owner.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I certainly agree that the average dog owner should not try the roll! Too dangerous!

That is true with many things in life - a pro can do it and it works but not so good for the average DIY.


----------



## Ucdcrush (Mar 22, 2004)

Cesar does not explicitly advocate trying his techniques, in fact he explicitly advocates contacting a professional and not trying the techniques at home.

And if I were him, knowing what he could do, why invite the humane society to the shoot? He knows what he's doing and it is not his intention to hurt the dog, so having the humane society involved doesn't really make any sense.

All CM threads eventually head to the positive vs. not debate, interestingly.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

i alpha roll my dog when he gets too overbearing and distraction doesn't work, but it seems as soon as i roll him on his back, straddle him and grab his neck he submits just a couple seconds later, then i talk to him in a calm voice telling him to settle down and he does.. at least for an hour or so, but he's still not as obnoxious indoors


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

I pinned my dog a few (less than 6?) times in her 6 - 8 month mouthy period when her attitude became too aggressive. That was almost a year ago and she has become a very nice and fun dog that knows when to ease off.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

So if you had to do it 6 times, it obviously didn't work? 
If the attitude gets "too aggressive" at my house, the dog just wins the crate. 
I think maturity helps dogs know when to ease off. I doubt the pinning had much to do with it.
I'd rather work on a strong bond at 6-8 months and have the dog be willing to please than pin or roll it to comply. Pinning/alpha rolling does nothing for bonding.


----------



## Zoeys mom (Jan 23, 2010)

I've never felt the need to pin a dog- is this just me? If a dog is hyper and out of control jumping and nipping it is either a puppy, isn't getting enough exercise, or both,lol Pinning for these behaviors IMO is just pointless since they are either encouraged by age, or the laziness of their owner. Engage your dog mentally and physically and not only will they be calmer, but learn to see you as their leader and friend.

Pinning for aggressive behaviors is not something I would encourage either. Aggression usually is a sign of illness, lack of socialization, or fear, and not because the dog is "mean". So if you are pinning a dog that falls under these categories you are ignoring and not treating an illness, or reinforcing that humans can be scary. I've never met a dog that needed to be dominated. I've met dogs with poor manners, that weren't socialized, or were abused and all they needed was patience and slow and consistent training. 

Experienced or not I just can't believe pinning an out of control animal is the only option, or even useful in developing a bond and shaping appropriate behaviors. Dogs learn to respect you through praise, games, and yummy treats without creating a tense situation or scaring them into submission- JMO


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

i only do it once or twice.. and its not even a daily thing... just when he starts nipping my daughters or like i said above... but my parents did it about 6 times a day for their gordon setter and he turned out to be a perfect dog... untill he got cushings disease )c: now he's completely blind and well getting older, but he's still a playful dog


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

codmaster said:


> and we should probably also count the number of dogs that were headed for the needle before he came across them, you think?
> 
> And it sounds like the folks that you have quoted are definetly "positive only" advocates whom would of course be violently opposed to anything like cesars approach just on principle alone.
> 
> ...


well spoken


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

> And if I were him, knowing what he could do, why invite the humane society to the shoot? He knows what he's doing and it is not his intention to hurt the dog, so having the humane society involved doesn't really make any sense.


The American Humane Association is a humane organization protecting children and animals but are not the humane society that is mostly thought of today. _Are you speaking of the Humane Society of the United States or another?_

The AHA have been involved in protecting animals in movies and television for many years. They are the organization that stepped forward and stopped the use of trip wires on running horses and even the intentional killing of horses in the early movies. They have reps on movie and tv sets around the world. So yes it does make sense to have them during filming unless you do have something you do not want seen. Most film makers and tv producers are proud of getting the AHA seal of approval to put on their credits. 

If you are interested in reading more about the AHA and their work with animals in the movies and tv you can go to
http://www.americanhumane.org/protecting-animals/programs/no-animals-were-harmed/

Quote from the website above:
_" ... the only animal welfare organization with oversight sanctioned by the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), ... "_


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

And to get back to the OP's questioning first post which does not even mention rehabilitating aggressive dogs nor mention dogs who are about to be euthanized:
_I have heard some people hate it and some people love it, or at least think it's a natural training method. I have never done this physically to my dogs but my pup Riley will submissivly roll on his back when I give him the "You're in trouble look." I used to get on the floor and play with him and that's when he started doing it. It would be when I would love on him and put my face around his neck. That's when he would automatically do it. Now he just does it if I give him a certain look, or when I give him a good ole belly rub! What is your opinion of people who purposfully incorporate "Pinning" or the "Alpha roll" for training?_ 
​I do not believe that an "Alpha roll" should be a part of training and my _opinion of people who purposfully incorporate "Pinning" or the "Alpha roll" for training_ is that they do not know how to train a dog.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I love these threads. They always make me go home and hug my dogs. Alpha hugs are better than alpha rolls any day. 

I find it interesting that if people do not agree with training collars, or Cesar Millan, or alpha rolling, they must be for postive only and offer no corrections. It is also interesting that most people who ARE for compulsion methods, training collars, CM, or alpha rolling are OFTEN in aggreement with more than one of these, maybe they need more than one of these to manage their dogs. Maybe that says something about postive training techniques, that people who train their dogs without such (compulsive) methods and with success, are actually having less issues than those who feel it necessary to dominate, jerk, shock, and roll their dogs over for submission. 

Gotta go home, flip my dog over and blow rasberries in her belly now.


----------



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

ayoitzrimz said:


> I stand corrected on my previous post.


Why? Your previous post actually made more sense, there was no need to "correct" yourself based on someone else's opinion.


----------



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

I'm really sick of people saying that other dog professionals who criticize Cesar in any way must be acting out of jealousy.  Really? That's the only reason why they might speak out against some of his methods? Not because he's ever wrong? Or because some of the things he does on his show might be dangerous for the average (clueless) dog owner? Whatever.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I'm really sick of people saying that other dog professionals who criticize Cesar in any way must be acting out of jealousy.  Really? That's the only reason why they might speak out against some of his methods? Not because he's ever wrong? Or because some of the things he does on his show might be dangerous for the average (clueless) dog owner? Whatever.


im not bashing cesar, but i want to know what goes on in the out-takes, everything i see in the show (which is very little) seems correct, but what about shows that didn't make it to television because they didn't like the end result... but thats one thing i hate about "reality" shows, not just this one


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

Zoeys mom said:


> Pinning for aggressive behaviors is not something I would encourage either. Aggression usually is a sign of illness, lack of socialization, or fear, and not because the dog is "mean". So if you are pinning a dog that falls under these categories you are ignoring and not treating an illness, or reinforcing that humans can be scary. I've never met a dog that needed to be dominated. I've met dogs with poor manners, that weren't socialized, or were abused and all they needed was patience and slow and consistent training.


Actually, I wouldn't recommend that someone who wasn't a professional or who didn't have a good deal of experience handling dogs pin a large, unsocialized, fearful dog. <i>However</i>, pinning a dog down gently but firmly can actually work rather well in these cases<i>if you can prevent the dog from responding with stereotyped behaviors or driving you off</i>. You aren't causing pain if the restraint is properly applied, but you're preventing the dog from responding in the way that it usually would to a stimulus, which helps extinguish the response. And that's just for general freaking out. If the dog is attempting to drive you away from some resource, as one poster here mentioned about her adolescent pup, I personally think that a flip-and-pin, or grab-and-hug, or some other method that brings the dog under your immediate physical control and close contact is one of the best responses possible. (Of course, I'm talking about a adolescent pup's first tentative efforts, not a dog with ingrained resource-aggressiveness. That's something different. And of course I'm not talking about play-growling during play.) It provokes a strong aversive startle from the dog without causing pain, and it teaches the dog that growling or snapping at you in such a way not only -doesn't- drive you off (which is the result that the dog was trying for,) but it results in exactly the opposite of what the dog wants. It is also, as you know, a very dominant move, which is _precisely_ what's needed to head this kind of thing off on its first occurrence.

(This is actually the method that I used to tame several territorial biter rats, who actually share a lot of behavioral responses with dogs, but are even harder to punish meaningfully, or use positive reinforcement on to eliminate this type of behavior. I tried. I could produce no treat that overrode the bite-from-hiding response. They kept biting me whenever I would reach into or near a den-type area or if they were undercover somewhere. So, whenever they bit me, I'd immediately grab them, flip 'em, and pin 'em, which is a natural behavior during play and dominance battles among rats -- or if I was already holding them, I'd just keep holding them and turn them on their backs and give a quick shake. The _only_ time I showed such behavior to them was when they either were biting or had just bitten me. All other interactions were full of positive reinforcement. About three days later they were only mouthing me, which was acceptable, and the next time I got bit by one of those rats was about a year and some later when one of them was in respiratory distress and not exactly conscious. Other than the biting, which only ever occurred in limited areas, they never showed any fear of me; in fact, they'd do just about anything to interact with me, most of the time. The point is: delivering appropriate punishment to an animal in a way that it understands and can control isn't going to cause mental damage to the animal, and can be extremely effective and humane.)

Sometimes punishment really -is- the best response: if you're trying to teach the dog not to do something that is highly rewarding to do, you have to either come up with a reward that's -better- for +R training ... or an aversive stimulus that's stronger. And since punishment can often end a behavior after one or a few applications, _so long as the dog hasn't had time to practice and reinforce the behavior_, it's often easier on you and the dog in the long run; a mild punishment could stop at the start, with one application, what it would take weeks or months of another method to try and correct -- and all that time you haven't ended the behavior, the dog is usually succeeding at reinforcing it.

Also, I would disagree with your assessment that pinning or otherwise applying similar punishments causes your dog to think that you're 'mean'. Done properly, the dog doesn't experience anything other than mild physical discomfort, which -should- end immediately when the dog submits -- and you should mark this point, the end of punishment, with a marker of some sort, you let it up, and then _reward it for complying._ Studies have shown that dogs don't resent punishments that are applied in the correct proportion and on a contingent basis; in fact, they seem to benefit from it, coming to understand limits and obtaining better impulse control. Of course, I don't think that this means that you should hit/beat/constantly scruff/roll/whatever your dog; I consider pinning a _dog_ (but not a puppy) to be a much stronger response than is usually needed for most of the offenses you encounter with a dog who's at least moderately well-adjusted. (Puppies are used to being corrected this way.) I find time outs to be appropriate for most dogs for most offenses, but I think that a time out, for a puppy, is actually pretty close to the top of the aversiveness scale, much higher than scruffing or pinning them is. (They have a high tolerance for physical correction, proportionate to their size, but social isolation is an extremely stressful experience for most puppies.)

...Holy dang this got long.  But the point is, different problems need different solutions, and punishment isn't, by itself, a bad thing, and mild aversive punishments can actually help improve your dog's ability to react to adversity and enhance the leader-follower bond. However, for many people, punishment can be extremely difficult to deliver properly, both because they misunderstand how to apply it, cannot judge the right intensity, cannot judge the right type of punishment for the offense, and tend to get emotionally invested in it. They apply it on a noncontingent basis so the dog doesn't know why it's getting punished and they give the dog no way to feel that it's in control of being punished or not. And most people suck at really -reading- their dogs and understanding their motivations, which is necessary for formulating proper punishments and punishment intensities. All of these things can lead to really screwed up dogs.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

to me, pinning a dog (as you said) should be a positive dominate roll, just enough for him to completely relax and also like you said, it shouldn't be painful what-so-ever.. to me this is telling the pup that what he is doing is unacceptable and needs to pay attention to commands given (off, down, no bite, gentle, whatever words you use) and like i said earlier, i only do this when he is not uncontrollable through commands or redirection.. and by uncontrollable i mean by jumping on my daughters, biting harder then a gentle, or anything that pretty much can cause pain to someone... i know most of it is playing, but sometimes he just needs a reality check to understand that he is hurting the girls or myself, and also i usually only do it after a quick scruff shake. When I do my rolls if the scruff don't work it honestly only lasts 20 seconds before he's completely calm and his tongue hangs out... after im done rolling, he's really playful and will come up to me and start licking my face and hands but will quit doing what ever the reason he got rolled for.. its always in steps, a firm no, a scruff shake, then a roll... so to me personally, i don't think its going overboard


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

I wholeheartedly agree that different problems warrant different solutions but the alpha roll is one technique that I will never again use. I say never again because I trained my first gsd using the original Monks of New Skete book and back then they were big on the alpha roll. So I dominated my dog...big time. She was my first dog and she had a lot of spirit and attitude. I used lots of compulsion training with her because that's what I thought you had to do to have a well trained dog. Massie was a very tough dog and the alpha roll was something I used a lot as a pup but rarely as an adult. It sometimes took her a while to learn things, even though she was extremely smart. She HATED the alpha roll but it wasn't until much later that I understood why. In retrospect it was cruel and completely unnecessary in training her. 

She's the one who taught me that lesson. One day when Chama was a puppy she jumped the fence after a bunny. Massie and I ran as fast as we could after her but Chama was much too fast for us. I was worried sick and was also very angry. When she returned to us I grabbed for her, screaming at her and fully intending to alpha roll her. However, Massie stepped in front of me and very gently backed me off. And suddenly something clicked in my brain: I was acting like a crazy person! My job was to be a fair, confident and consistent leader and intimidating Chama, who was following her hound instincts, was neither fair, consistent or a particularly effective way to train a dog not to chase bunnies. It was, however, an EXCELLENT way to screw up my relationship with Chama and to make her fear me! 

The most difficult dog I ever trained was Basu. He was 4.5 years old and fear aggressive (and yes, he would bite) and he challenged every thing I thought I knew about how to train dogs. I used positive reinforcement and counter conditioning with him and he went from being *terrified* of people to being a pretty typical gsd, if a little overzealous in the protection department (and he was always protecting himself and never me or any other people or animals). I am quite certain that had he ended up in most other households he would have been pts. 

After adopting Basu I changed my training style with Chama. I switched to positive reinforcement. Wow, what a difference! My formerly stubborn dog couldn't wait to figure out what I wanted from her next. :wild:

That is the abridged story with just a few of my dogs...the moral is that I stopped using that misunderstood and useless technique 20 years ago and I've never looked backs since. 

There are far, far better ways to get your dog to respect you as a leader. A good place to start is acting the way a leader should act: set clear boundaries, be consistent in what you expect, act clear, calm and confident at all times, set your dog up to succeed and keep in mind at all times that your end goal is to build a positive relationship with your dog. 

If you all could see Rafi in action you'd get why I switched training philosophies.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

selzer said:


> It is also interesting that most people who ARE for compulsion methods, training collars, CM, or alpha rolling are OFTEN in aggreement with more than one of these, maybe they need more than one of these to manage their dogs. Maybe that says something about postive training techniques, that people who train their dogs without such (compulsive) methods and with success, are actually having less issues than those who feel it necessary to dominate, jerk, shock, and roll their dogs over for submission.


Well, to compare, we'd first need to establish whether, on average, dogs trained using only positive methods were better-behaved than dogs trained using both positive methods and corrections. You'd also have to take into account which took longer, and which dogs were better-adjusted to general situations. Also, some dogs are simply better at interpreting what we want, or more sensitive to the withdrawal of reinforcers.

Also, we have to establish that people use pure +R methods because they work better, and not because they have an ideological opposition to anything they consider to be punishment, which is what I think the real difference comes from in quite a lot of cases. Those who acknowledge that correction has a place in training will use multiple methods because they know that some things are better suited to correcting certain dogs and certain behaviors by them than others. Whereas anti-punishment ideologues, by their nature, have only +R to work with. 

It should be noted that, in terms of the amount of extinction of a behavior that it can produce, a 60-second time out, for a normal, social dog, is roughly equivalent to a brief shock. (1-2mA @ 30ms.) It can be inferred that it causes roughly the same amount of distress to the dog. Is a time out then as 'bad' as shocking your dog?

Similarly, are bitches abusing their pups when they mouth or pin 'em or even nip back for nipping on 'em too hard? I wouldn't think so, because the pup understands the correction at an instinctual or near-instinctual level, and the corrections are always applied in a consistent, fair manner contingent on the actions of the pup.

Is booby-trapping objects you don't want your pups to investigate with a can with some pennies in it abusive? (The goal is to have it fall and startle the pup, not fall -on- the pup. ) I wouldn't say so, but a single encounter like that can keep the animal off and wary of something like a firepit grill or a laundry chute for life, and most physical corrections that you could administer without causing actual damage probably don't provide such a long-lasting aversive impression. (At least not of the object you're trying to provide the motivation to not bother. Of you, on the other hand...dogs understand 'correction' but they don't understand abuse.)

Anyway. For a long time, dog training methods were mired in abuse -- similar to horse training methods. You broke a hunting dog or a horse, you didn't train it. Even now, so many people utterly suck at applying punishment to a dog, tending towards abuse instead, so people who actually care about animals have swung in the opposite direction, to the opposite extreme. I'm apalled now at the way that we treated the first dog my family had, and even now most people wouldn't see any problem with the way that we raised it. So there's even a good motivation to tell inexperienced owners to swing to the other extreme: because it's a lot harder to really screw up a dog with poor +R technique than it is with poor correction technique. But I've put a lot of study into behavioral science and dogs since then, and I now use very +R methods. However, I'm also aware of the power of properly applied punishments, and believe that they are, in general, good for the dog if properly, consistently, and fairly applied.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

BowWowMeow said:


> I wholeheartedly agree that different problems warrant different solutions but the alpha roll is one technique that I will never again use. I say never again because I trained my first gsd using the original Monks of New Skete book and back then they were big on the alpha roll. So I dominated my dog...big time.


Yeah. About the only time I feel something like a roll is appropriate on a dog for is correcting aggressive or dominating behavior towards you, and even then, it has to be the right kind of dog. Also, I'd posit that the reason that the one dog got pissed when you tried to correct the other when it came back to you was because _it came back to you_ and thus complied with you. You were about to punish it for doing the right thing. If you'd tackled the dog while it was still running I think it might've been different.  But anyway. So long as we learn from our mistakes, it's a good thing, right?



> There are far, far better ways to get your dog to respect you as a leader. A good place to start is acting the way a leader should act: set clear boundaries, be consistent in what you expect, act clear, calm and confident at all times, set your dog up to succeed and keep in mind at all times that your end goal is to build a positive relationship with your dog.


Amen. If you keep that in mind, you can't go too far wrong no matter what methods you use.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

Montana Scout said:


> to me, pinning a dog (as you said) should be a positive dominate roll, just enough for him to completely relax and also like you said, it shouldn't be painful what-so-ever.. to me this is telling the pup that what he is doing is unacceptable and needs to pay attention to commands given (off, down, no bite, gentle, whatever words you use) and like i said earlier, i only do this when he is not uncontrollable through commands or redirection.. and by uncontrollable i mean by jumping on my daughters, biting harder then a gentle, or anything that pretty much can cause pain to someone... i know most of it is playing, but sometimes he just needs a reality check to understand that he is hurting the girls or myself, and also i usually only do it after a quick scruff shake. When I do my rolls if the scruff don't work it honestly only lasts 20 seconds before he's completely calm and his tongue hangs out... after im done rolling, he's really playful and will come up to me and start licking my face and hands but will quit doing what ever the reason he got rolled for.. its always in steps, a firm no, a scruff shake, then a roll... so to me personally, i don't think its going overboard


This is a great example of what I mean, both in appropriateness of punishment type and intensity for the behavior and in how pups understand these actions when they're appropriately applied. They oughta cool it but still be seeking interaction.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

beowolf said:


> I'm only counting on my dog learning the lesson.
> If you have a dog that doesn't understand, then your role as pack leader isn't firmly established with your dog. Part of being a pack leader is being a food source. If your dog is unsure about where it's food comes from, you're heading down a slippery slope. I want my dog to ALWAYS understand that I'm not only his source of food, I'm the source of his lack of food. I'm the pack leader.



Your dog might understand where its food comes from, and when you do provide food it'll have a massive boost as a positive reinforcer because of the prior fasting, but it'd take a brilliant dog to associate not getting food with a behavior that it performed the day before. It'd also cause a lot of stress and be likely to evoke undesireable behavior as their routine is inexplicably disrupted. 

For food to motivate a dog like you speak -- to give you obedience because you give him food -- the dog has to understand that whether or not he is fed is contingent on his obedience. And, frankly, that can be done by making the dog obey any obedience command before being fed.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

ayoitzrimz said:


> Just my 2 cents:
> I would never alpha roll my dog and would never recommend to anyone to do it. Just like people have posted this is NOT a natural behavior in wolves as previously thought. Actually, this position is GIVEN by the submissive dog rather than FORCED upon.


Smile. Humor me. If you're not already happy, smile. Just plaster your face with a big, stupid grin. It's not like anyone's going to see you, right?

Feel better, happier? Even a little bit? If you're like the majority of the population, you do. This is because an internal stimulus (happiness) which causes a behavioral response (smiling) has actually become so linked to smiling that forcing the response (smiling) as a stimulus actually brings out what was originally the stimulus (feeling good) as a response. 

Being placed in a submissive posture can evoke submissive behavior in the same way. It's literally incompatible with dominant or aggressive behavior.


----------



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

Tropism said:


> Being placed in a submissive posture can evoke submissive behavior in the same way. It's literally incompatible with dominant or aggressive behavior.


But rather than PUTTING your dog in a submissive posture, you can also encourage your dog to offer deference behaviors on a routine basis, as in NILIF. Practicing deference will cause a dog to become deferent. Wouldn't it be better for your dog to voluntarily submit to you than to have to physically force him to? True leaders do not need to resort to physical force to elicit cooperation.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

tropism said:


> actually, i wouldn't recommend that someone who wasn't a professional or who didn't have a good deal of experience handling dogs pin a large, unsocialized, fearful dog. <i>however</i>, pinning a dog down gently but firmly can actually work rather well in these cases<i>if you can prevent the dog from responding with stereotyped behaviors or driving you off</i>. You aren't causing pain if the restraint is properly applied, but you're preventing the dog from responding in the way that it usually would to a stimulus, which helps extinguish the response. And that's just for general freaking out. If the dog is attempting to drive you away from some resource, as one poster here mentioned about her adolescent pup, i personally think that a flip-and-pin, or grab-and-hug, or some other method that brings the dog under your immediate physical control and close contact is one of the best responses possible. (of course, i'm talking about a adolescent pup's first tentative efforts, not a dog with ingrained resource-aggressiveness. That's something different. And of course i'm not talking about play-growling during play.) it provokes a strong aversive startle from the dog without causing pain, and it teaches the dog that growling or snapping at you in such a way not only -doesn't- drive you off (which is the result that the dog was trying for,) but it results in exactly the opposite of what the dog wants. It is also, as you know, a very dominant move, which is _precisely_ what's needed to head this kind of thing off on its first occurrence.
> 
> (this is actually the method that i used to tame several territorial biter rats, who actually share a lot of behavioral responses with dogs, but are even harder to punish meaningfully, or use positive reinforcement on to eliminate this type of behavior. I tried. I could produce no treat that overrode the bite-from-hiding response. They kept biting me whenever i would reach into or near a den-type area or if they were undercover somewhere. So, whenever they bit me, i'd immediately grab them, flip 'em, and pin 'em, which is a natural behavior during play and dominance battles among rats -- or if i was already holding them, i'd just keep holding them and turn them on their backs and give a quick shake. The _only_ time i showed such behavior to them was when they either were biting or had just bitten me. All other interactions were full of positive reinforcement. About three days later they were only mouthing me, which was acceptable, and the next time i got bit by one of those rats was about a year and some later when one of them was in respiratory distress and not exactly conscious. Other than the biting, which only ever occurred in limited areas, they never showed any fear of me; in fact, they'd do just about anything to interact with me, most of the time. The point is: Delivering appropriate punishment to an animal in a way that it understands and can control isn't going to cause mental damage to the animal, and can be extremely effective and humane.)
> 
> ...


 i agree.good post!


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

tropism said:


> smile. Humor me. If you're not already happy, smile. Just plaster your face with a big, stupid grin. It's not like anyone's going to see you, right?
> 
> Feel better, happier? Even a little bit? If you're like the majority of the population, you do. This is because an internal stimulus (happiness) which causes a behavioral response (smiling) has actually become so linked to smiling that forcing the response (smiling) as a stimulus actually brings out what was originally the stimulus (feeling good) as a response.
> 
> Being placed in a submissive posture can evoke submissive behavior in the same way. It's literally incompatible with dominant or aggressive behavior.


 you have a great view on the way things work.i enjoy reading your posts.i am pro rolling when its called for which is not often.i've only ever had to do it twice with a young pup and have never grabbed his scruff shook and forced them down.he was familiar with it because i rolled him when he was tiny.when the undesired behaviour occurs,lets say "aggressive/dominating" i give a strong verbal no and and use body language as well such as closing his mouth.when the behaviour is repeated i say no again and then gentley hold and push them onto their side calmly and roll them onto their back.i repeat the verbal no and wait till they relax.as soon as they relax i let them up and continue on as if nothing happened.i wait to give praise only after they have shown good behaviour after this point.i have had many dogs in my lifetime where i never had to use this.where they naturally rolled and followed but there will always be the one that pushes and tests to see how high they can rank.i will never have a dog that i fear.nor should anybody be afraid of their dog.i've heard people say that they have a well trained dog that has beautiful manners but then they turn and say they would never roll their dog because its dangerous and you would have to be brave or stupid to do a roll.i do not see how that is a well mannered dog.from a young age puppies should be well handled and rolled just casually to subject them to manipulations that will be required of them as they mature.it should not be a struggle to roll your dog over.it should be natural and without fear for the dog and the human.people argue that its not natural,well will they continue to argue that many schutzhund requirements are not natural?i mean we train our dogs in many ways to do things that are not natural and may not always be comfortable for the dog but are done none the less because dogs have to adapt to our lifestyle no if ands or buts.submissive dogs are put in situations that they would normally run away from but we force them to confront them head on and see nothing wrong with the discomfort that dog is feeling.a dog that would do anything not to confont but would rather run and hide in a hole or under a table is pulled out and coaxed to deal with it.i have not seen many people argue for the way people treat submissive dog before.or defending their lets say fear biting.its a natural thing for a scared dog to do but we do not condone the behaviour rather we try to modify it and in modifying i pretty sure that dog is put in some uncomfortable positions in order to lean what "we" deem as "right" diffrent methods for diffrent people will get diffrent results.all we can do is try.and once again,what may be good for one is not always good for another.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Tropism said:


> Well, to compare, we'd first need to establish whether, on average, dogs trained using only positive methods were better-behaved than dogs trained using both positive methods and corrections. You'd also have to take into account which took longer, and which dogs were better-adjusted to general situations. Also, some dogs are simply better at interpreting what we want, or more sensitive to the withdrawal of reinforcers.
> 
> Also, we have to establish that people use pure +R methods because they work better, and not because they have an ideological opposition to anything they consider to be punishment, which is what I think the real difference comes from in quite a lot of cases. Those who acknowledge that correction has a place in training will use multiple methods because they know that some things are better suited to correcting certain dogs and certain behaviors by them than others. Whereas anti-punishment ideologues, by their nature, have only +R to work with.
> 
> ...



Where to start? First of all, who said that people who train with positive methods use NO corrections? I correct my dogs. Normally that is a simple tone of voice change, that is usually all that is required. 

I have never boobie trapped ANYTHING. I do not find that fair. Unless you consider the solar powered electric fence wire near the base of my solid/wire fence. It is no longer there, but it was more of a safety thing, than a correction, and because they were aware of it, could see it and avoid it, I do not feel it was a boobie trap at all.

I have left bitches with pups long after ten weeks. I have NEVER seen one roll one of the pups over, and I have NEVER seen one nip a puppy. I have been able to let six month old pups run with their dam without any issues. After that, I really do not see a need for it. Usually dam and pups are separated when I am not there to observe just prior to four months. No alpha rolls, no snapping. 

And this is something many of the newbies with sheps do not understand. They have this eight week old puppy and are asking when they can fit it with a prong collar, and when they should start working with an e-fence. What kind of corrections they should give the puppy. When a bitch with puppies will pretty much let a youngster climb all over her, chew on her, and eat out of her food dish until that pup is a good four to five months old. Even after that, they put up an awful lot from pups. 

It is we humans that expect puppies to come out of puppy classes with a wonderful set of manners, and a great understanding and compliance with commands. We seem to think they are much older than they are. Yes, young puppies can learn to heel and to get it in and sit straight and to down on command and stay. But at what cost, if the methods used are compusive?


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

I cannot think of one single incident where an alpha roll is necessary. This is because I can think of a million other ways to deal with that situation that don't involve physically FORCING my dog to submit to me. One of the things that drives me nuts about Cesar Milan (and a certain other forum on the internet) is that people who don't know much about dogs and people who feel the need to dominate their dogs get the idea or reinforcement that certain behaviors indicate some sort of dominance agenda on the dog's part. 

NEWS FLASH: The huge majority of dogs do not have a dominance agenda! The might resource guard their bones or their food because they've been taught that you might very well take it from them in an unpredictable way and they might push their way out of the door because they are excited about getting some exercise but neither of these actions mean the dog has a dominance agenda. 

Let's face it: there are people out there who get pleasure out of causing their dogs pain (even if it's a sharp correction with a prong collar that makes the dog yelp. I hear people all of the time say things like, "See now I got his attention...") and seeing their dogs act physically deferential towards them. It personally makes me sick when I see this type of behavior because it's saying loudly and clearly that inappropriate physical punishment is being used to "train" the dog. The dog across the street is a case in point. Any time she doesn't instantly obey their command they force her to obey. Their entire family can call that dog until they're hoarse and she won't come but if I call her one time she comes to me instantly and sits in front of me. She also obeys other commands from me immediately but ignores her family. I use treats and praise with her, they use physical force (pushing her butt down to sit, etc.). 

I've had dogs for 23 years now and I've seen the difference in my own dogs between dogs who were trained primarily with aversives and dogs who were trained primarily with positive reinforcement and counter conditioning. Give me the latter type of dog any day.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Good post Ruth.


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

And just wanted to add that I've had fosters and adopted dogs who people considered really tough, difficult to train (and even dangerous) dogs. In no cases was it ever necessary to alpha roll or physically dominate those dogs. 

And when I used to do that stuff to my dogs it really did make me feel sick to see the fear in their eyes. Why do people want their dogs to fear them????? That's not true respect.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

BowWowMeow said:


> And when I used to do that stuff to my dogs it really did make me feel sick to see the fear in their eyes. Why do people want their dogs to fear them????? That's not true respect.


I agree. The animal learns to avoid the punishment but not necessarily respect the owner. It happens with parents and their kids too.


----------



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

BowWowMeow said:


> NEWS FLASH: The huge majority of dogs do not have a dominance agenda! The might resource guard their bones or their food because they've been taught that you might very well take it from them in an unpredictable way and they might push their way out of the door because they are excited about getting some exercise but neither of these actions mean the dog has a dominance agenda.



:thumbup: Excellent post Ruth.


----------



## ayoitzrimz (Apr 14, 2010)

selzer said:


> Where to start? First of all, who said that people who train with positive methods use NO corrections? I correct my dogs. Normally that is a simple tone of voice change, that is usually all that is required.
> 
> I have never boobie trapped ANYTHING. I do not find that fair. Unless you consider the solar powered electric fence wire near the base of my solid/wire fence. It is no longer there, but it was more of a safety thing, than a correction, and because they were aware of it, could see it and avoid it, I do not feel it was a boobie trap at all.
> 
> ...


I think, and this is just my opinion, that comparisons of how wolves correct each other and how a mother corrects her young are a little difficult to use as a basis to how we should educate our dogs. I want to make it clear that I'm against alpha rolling specifically because I think it's outdated and the average person (including myself) is not quick enough and is too emotional to be able to administer it correctly. Now with that said, I do correct my dog and I do have a prong on him. The prong correction or a verbal correction is not something seen in nature. In fact, in nature canines correct each other with a swift inhibited bite across the muzzle, or with a hard stare. We humans simply do not have the speed to administer this correction. So dogs have adapted to living with us, and we have adapted to living with them. I try to keep the comparisons between a dog that's living with other dogs and a dog that lives in a mixed setting of dogs and humans.

In nature, puppies are "untouchable". Most well socialized adults will let puppies crawl all over them, nip them, and will tolerate a lot when a puppy is involved. However canines in nature also roll around in feces and hunt and kill prey animals. Are we supposed to let our puppies do that here as well? No, we brought them into our society through domestication and a dog living with humans should learn certain manners.

Now, in Schutzhund my dog learns to heel, sit, down, recalls, attention, etc. That doesn't mean I jerked the prong until he laid down in learned helplessness (when an animal tries to simply do as little as possible to avoid the correction, usually when it does not know how to avoid it). I taught him using prey items and food. Now that I know 100% that he knows what the verbal commands mean (we spent alot of time with my back facing him and my eyes to sky as I give the command) I will correct him if he chooses not to perform obedience command but I won't "kill" the poor dog. In fact, my dog NEVER yelped from a leash correction from me. Not even one of those "see, you caught him by surprise and now he's focused on you" yelps. But a quick leash pop will refocus him momentarily if he's doing something I'd prefer he wont. The point is to read the dog, and learn how much you can correct him (if any. I mean I would never even put a prong on a fearful, shy, or aggressive dog. Those dogs should be rehabilitated using +R methods).

Anyway I'm digressing, sorry!

The point I'm trying to make is:
1. In relevance to this topic, there are better ways to correct a dog than alpha rolling him, and this should be left to a professional
2. In relevance to the latest posts, I think that most owner find a middle area between old fashioned "jerk and tug" methods and "new age" +R methods and that's fine. I think that leaning too heavily towards either side is not the way to go (but that's just my opinion).

And since I made this post completely irrelevant to the topic anyway  and I know a lot of new owners will read this and get completely confused by how we all digressed (hey it's human, and we all love our dogs. I could talk dogs for hours on end) I think maybe a good list of books to read will help?

So here are some books I would recommend for a new dog owner:
1. The Art of Raising a Puppy - Monks of New Skete
2. How to Be Your Dog's Best Friend - Monks of New Skete
3. The Other End of the Leash - Patricia McConnell Phd
4. The Power of Positive Dog Training - Pat Miller
5. One or two books by Cesar Millan
6. Anything by Ivan Balabanov, if you intend to do Schutzhund or other sports


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

BowWowMeow said:


> And just wanted to add that I've had fosters and adopted dogs who people considered really tough, difficult to train (and even dangerous) dogs. In no cases was it ever necessary to alpha roll or physically dominate those dogs.
> 
> And when I used to do that stuff to my dogs it really did make me feel sick to see the fear in their eyes. Why do people want their dogs to fear them????? That's not true respect.


 When i roll any of my dogs for fun or otherwise I never see fear.And there should not be fear present to begin with.When I had to roll oso as a small puppy for unacceptable behaviour he knew he had done something that made me upset.We had a good bond before that incident and he trusted me already,so when I rolled him over he kicked a couple times and then said ok I get it I'm not the boss and I need to relax and listen.This was not an all out war and he was screaming in fear of his life.This was a gentle reminder that I feed him not the other way around.He was in no way dominated to a puddling mess and now thinks I am a horrible bully.He respects my space and person and is a happy dog who follows me wherever I go.
With all due respect there will be clashes with any training method.I have a preference not to use a prong but to each his own.Its just that I find that a gentle roll stops further issues from developing down the road due to heirachy issue related problems.I get results that last and without having to jerk,pinch, repeat massive repetition,yell,lock up,withdraw,ignore,muzzle,coax ect. 
people need to keep an open broad minded view to all possabilities and try not to go into extremisim wether it be one way or the other.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

selzer said:


> I have left bitches with pups long after ten weeks. I have NEVER seen one roll one of the pups over, and I have NEVER seen one nip a puppy. I have been able to let six month old pups run with their dam without any issues. After that, I really do not see a need for it. Usually dam and pups are separated when I am not there to observe just prior to four months. No alpha rolls, no snapping.
> 
> ?


 Seriously?you've never seen a bitch mouth her pup and give it a warning growl when a particular pup starts biting her ear too hard or refuses to stop nursing even after she gets up and starts walking away?I've seen the nip and growl and the pup who rolls and pees it's self.She then calmly licks and cleans the mess and then ignores the pup.I will see the same pup try it again and she will swing her head and give him the look and then that settles it.the pup trots off and does the same to another litter mate instead.
I've also seen where they use their front feet to wrap around the other dogs neck to get them down.Wether in play or earnest combat.I'll post a small clip of acero trying to dominate oso while playing today.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Personally I have never rolled my current dog (but felt like spanking him a couple times!!!!!!!) but I have grabbedboth sides of his head and looked deep into his eyes and explained what proper behavior is! he seemed to get the idea and certainly never seemed too upset about it. OTOH, he is a very "hard" dog and criticism never seemed to phase him unlike some of our earlier dogs.

The key is to find out which approach to training and "Corrections" work best for you and your dog.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

:thumbup:


codmaster said:


> Personally I have never rolled my current dog (but felt like spanking him a couple times!!!!!!!) but I have grabbedboth sides of his head and looked deep into his eyes and explained what proper behavior is! he seemed to get the idea and certainly never seemed too upset about it. OTOH, he is a very "hard" dog and criticism never seemed to phase him unlike some of our earlier dogs.
> 
> The key is to find out which approach to training and "Corrections" work best for you and your dog.


 :thumbup:


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

tierra nuestra said:


> Seriously?you've never seen a bitch mouth her pup and give it a warning growl when a particular pup starts biting her ear too hard or refuses to stop nursing even after she gets up and starts walking away?I've seen the nip and growl and the pup who rolls and pees it's self.She then calmly licks and cleans the mess and then ignores the pup.I will see the same pup try it again and she will swing her head and give him the look and then that settles it.the pup trots off and does the same to another litter mate instead.
> I've also seen where they use their front feet to wrap around the other dogs neck to get them down.Wether in play or earnest combat.I'll post a small clip of acero trying to dominate oso while playing today.


This is how my mammas are, no nipping, no alpha rolling:


















































































OMG!!!! DOMINANCE!!!! (ROFLMBO):


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Guess some mother dogs are just nicer to their pups than other ones. A couple that we have seen have corrected their pups when they got a little rough with little puppy teeth - once on a pup that we later took home. So that one pup at least was accustomed to being corrected without a treat! didn't seem to have any discernible bad affect on the mother-puppy relationship.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Who corrects a puppy with a treat???

I generally give my bitches a way away from their brood, so they do not have to get nasty with them, they just leap over the side of the whelping box or over the x-pen when they need to get out of there for a spell.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

selzer said:


> Where to start? First of all, who said that people who train with positive methods use NO corrections? I correct my dogs. Normally that is a simple tone of voice change, that is usually all that is required.


I'm not saying that no one who uses positive methods corrects their dog, I'm saying that there's a large and annoying portion of those who use +r methods who claim you should never, ever correct your dog or even raise your voice to it. As I said before, I'm a huge fan of positive reinforcement. I used clicker training to train my rats to do tricks, and it works even better with dogs. 

I just recognize that it makes for an incomplete training regimen, and some animals need more forceful correction for some behaviors than others.



> I have never boobie trapped ANYTHING. I do not find that fair. Unless you consider the solar powered electric fence wire near the base of my solid/wire fence. It is no longer there, but it was more of a safety thing, than a correction, and because they were aware of it, could see it and avoid it, I do not feel it was a boobie trap at all.


What's fairness have to do with it? It's not 'fair' when you pull an electrical cord away from a puppy that's gnawing on it -- you just stole its toy, you meanie! But it's the right thing to do. Bitter apple is also a booby trap, until the dog learns that the scent on an object means it's going to taste horrible. 

Booby-trapping kitchen counters with empty soda cans is a quite common (and entirely humane) method to discourage counter-surfers. If you have a wood stove or fireplace, it's a good idea for the dog to be leery of it. Startling booby traps also have the advantage, if they're set up correctly, of being automated.



> I have left bitches with pups long after ten weeks. I have NEVER seen one roll one of the pups over, and I have NEVER seen one nip a puppy. I have been able to let six month old pups run with their dam without any issues. After that, I really do not see a need for it. Usually dam and pups are separated when I am not there to observe just prior to four months. No alpha rolls, no snapping.


I dunno, but I've seen quite a few bitches mouth or hold down with a paw pups that were annoying them. Sometimes they're even more aggressive, as in 3 week old siberian husky puppies disciplined | Dogs and Puppies Blog . 

Besides, most of the harder corrections come around the time dogs wean, not when they're significantly older. They quickly learn what their mom's version of 'no' means. Just because you haven't observed the behavior doesn't mean it doesn't exist -- I and probably many others on this board have seen it. *shrugs*



> It is we humans that expect puppies to come out of puppy classes with a wonderful set of manners, and a great understanding and compliance with commands. We seem to think they are much older than they are. Yes, young puppies can learn to heel and to get it in and sit straight and to down on command and stay. But at what cost, if the methods used are compusive?


You assume a lot. I didn't say anything about prong collars or e-collars. And I assume that a puppy is a puppy. It has a few simple built-in drives and motivations and fears, but exactly what you need to help it realize its potential as a dog. Unless you teach it not to, it'll crap on your rug, eat your shoes, tear up the rug, pee on the cat, etc, etc, etc. Anything it finds rewarding that it doesn't learn not to do. Of course, the best way to do that is to not let the puppy engage in those activities, but sometimes it wants to engage in them more than it wants a treat or something. 

Also, people seem to give puppies too _little_ credit for their ability, IMO. At 7 or 8 weeks, they essentially have adult brains -- all the hardware is mostly there, but all you have to work with is the BIOS of instinct and the DOS of what the dog's learned already from living its life for 8 weeks. They are primed to learn, and learn rapidly; seeing a young pup doing obedience very well is indeed unusual but doesn't mean that the animal was given severe corrections during training. It's more likely the animal was simply bright, driven by pleasing people, and working with someone who didn't see its age as an obstacle to training. Also, this time, from about 8-16 weeks, is when dogs learn -most- rapidly and when learning stamps the deepest track in their brains. After that, learning slows down. 

I never mentioned using corrections like scruffing, rolling, e-collars, or anything like that as corrections during obedience training. That's rather ridiculous, using an elephant gun on a housefly. When a dog doesn't perform as he should, he gets a negative marker word and no treat. Leash pops if you need them while teaching heeling. That's about it. What I'm talking about is behavior which needs to be -stopped,- preferably as soon as possible.

...But I also wonder how many people would have such great problems during adolescence with carpet-sharking and general being-a-terror-ness if they laid down firm boundaries and enforced them with appropriate punishments when the pup was much younger. (No, this isn't meant as a slam to anyone out there whose pup -is- a terror, or anyone else. I'm literally wondering. I don't have any real source of reliable data.) When it comes down to it, +R is great at motivating a dog to do things, but some dogs need more of a reason _not to do_ some things than a 'No!' and not getting a treat.


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> But rather than PUTTING your dog in a submissive posture, you can also encourage your dog to offer deference behaviors on a routine basis, as in NILIF. Practicing deference will cause a dog to become deferent. Wouldn't it be better for your dog to voluntarily submit to you than to have to physically force him to?


Yes. But offering deference behaviors on a routine basis, which certainly should be encouraged, doesn't mean that the dog will always offer them, particularly if it gives dominant behavior (such as growling or possessive snapping) when doing something it enjoys (such as eating) and it is rewarded by having the owner tolerate it or, worse, back off. There are some behaviors which simply should never be allowed the chance to become ingrained and which, if offered by a 'normal' and known dog, should be met precipitously and with something that offers a strong aversive factor. (Note that I say 'aversive factor' and not 'pain'. I'm not talking about beating your dog, or hitting it, or hanging it, or anything like that. The biggest part of an aversive is a startle, really.) Punishment teaches a dog to _not_ do things, and doesn't work very well the other way around. (Actually, it _does_, but not in a way which is helpful at all to people most who want to train and raise a healthy, well-adjusted dog.)


----------



## Tropism (Nov 30, 2010)

BowWowMeow said:


> And when I used to do that stuff to my dogs it really did make me feel sick to see the fear in their eyes. Why do people want their dogs to fear them????? That's not true respect.


No, it's not. But most dogs won't fear their owners simply because they have been punished; the problem comes when the punishments are routinely excessive, when they're applied on a noncontingent basis (that is, the dog doesn't understand that it's being punished for a specific 'crime' it has committed,) and when the dog generally receives conflicting messages. This is why you see dogs that look shame-faced when their owner comes home and they've crapped in the house. They know that the presence of poo in the house will equal punishment when their owner comes home, though they don't make the leap that them defecating in the house equals poo on the floor. So they come to their owner seeking their owner's attention and social presence, but at the same time know that there's poo in the house and fear punishment. Sometimes, the dog is punished so randomly it cannot even have the comfort of knowing that it's safe when there's no poo in the house, or even when it's performing acts you ask of it, and then you just get that constant, pathetic, whipped-dog look whenever they're approached, that look of 'please don't hurt me but I want to be near you' that just makes me want to beat their owners with a stick.

A dog that learns that going in the garbage gets it squirted in the face with a water bottle doesn't come to fear its owner, even though it may hate getting sprayed more than being yelled at or held down or anything else reasonable, because it quickly learns that it'll only get squirted in the face under certain conditions. If it doesn't perform the actions that result in the squirting, it won't have to fear it. They'll even learn that, if they get squirted in the face while doing something new, or even if you just say the word you usually do right before they squirt them, that -they're doing something new- that may be punished, which is frankly an astonishing cognitive leap. 

As with a child, 'discipline' doesn't mean beatings and 'punishment' doesn't mean causing pain. I'm willing to bet that most people heres' parents have disciplined them pretty harshly on occasion, even if they didn't resort to spanking. (No one can crush someone with guilt like a mother.) Do you hate them for it? Odds are, if the punishments were appropriate for the crime, and were applied fairly, that no, you don't. You probably thank them for it. It seems to me that it's similar in dogs -- occasional, just punishment -- helps them learn boundaries.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

tropism said:


> no, it's not. But most dogs won't fear their owners simply because they have been punished; the problem comes when the punishments are routinely excessive, when they're applied on a noncontingent basis (that is, the dog doesn't understand that it's being punished for a specific 'crime' it has committed,) and when the dog generally receives conflicting messages. This is why you see dogs that look shame-faced when their owner comes home and they've crapped in the house. They know that the presence of poo in the house will equal punishment when their owner comes home, though they don't make the leap that them defecating in the house equals poo on the floor. So they come to their owner seeking their owner's attention and social presence, but at the same time know that there's poo in the house and fear punishment. Sometimes, the dog is punished so randomly it cannot even have the comfort of knowing that it's safe when there's no poo in the house, or even when it's performing acts you ask of it, and then you just get that constant, pathetic, whipped-dog look whenever they're approached, that look of 'please don't hurt me but i want to be near you' that just makes me want to beat their owners with a stick.
> 
> A dog that learns that going in the garbage gets it squirted in the face with a water bottle doesn't come to fear its owner, even though it may hate getting sprayed more than being yelled at or held down or anything else reasonable, because it quickly learns that it'll only get squirted in the face under certain conditions. If it doesn't perform the actions that result in the squirting, it won't have to fear it. They'll even learn that, if they get squirted in the face while doing something new, or even if you just say the word you usually do right before they squirt them, that -they're doing something new- that may be punished, which is frankly an astonishing cognitive leap.
> 
> As with a child, 'discipline' doesn't mean beatings and 'punishment' doesn't mean causing pain. I'm willing to bet that most people heres' parents have disciplined them pretty harshly on occasion, even if they didn't resort to spanking. (no one can crush someone with guilt like a mother.) do you hate them for it? Odds are, if the punishments were appropriate for the crime, and were applied fairly, that no, you don't. You probably thank them for it. It seems to me that it's similar in dogs -- occasional, just punishment -- helps them learn boundaries.


 
very well said and an excellent explanation!


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Tropism said:


> No, it's not. But most dogs won't fear their owners simply because they have been punished; the problem comes when the punishments are routinely excessive, when they're applied on a noncontingent basis (that is, the dog doesn't understand that it's being punished for a specific 'crime' it has committed,) and when the dog generally receives conflicting messages. This is why you see dogs that look shame-faced when their owner comes home and they've crapped in the house. They know that the presence of poo in the house will equal punishment when their owner comes home, though they don't make the leap that them defecating in the house equals poo on the floor. So they come to their owner seeking their owner's attention and social presence, but at the same time know that there's poo in the house and fear punishment. Sometimes, the dog is punished so randomly it cannot even have the comfort of knowing that it's safe when there's no poo in the house, or even when it's performing acts you ask of it, and then you just get that constant, pathetic, whipped-dog look whenever they're approached, that look of 'please don't hurt me but I want to be near you' that just makes me want to beat their owners with a stick.
> 
> A dog that learns that going in the garbage gets it squirted in the face with a water bottle doesn't come to fear its owner, even though it may hate getting sprayed more than being yelled at or held down or anything else reasonable, because it quickly learns that it'll only get squirted in the face under certain conditions. If it doesn't perform the actions that result in the squirting, it won't have to fear it. They'll even learn that, if they get squirted in the face while doing something new, or even if you just say the word you usually do right before they squirt them, that -they're doing something new- that may be punished, which is frankly an astonishing cognitive leap.
> 
> As with a child, 'discipline' doesn't mean beatings and 'punishment' doesn't mean causing pain. I'm willing to bet that most people heres' parents have disciplined them pretty harshly on occasion, even if they didn't resort to spanking. (No one can crush someone with guilt like a mother.) Do you hate them for it? Odds are, if the punishments were appropriate for the crime, and were applied fairly, that no, you don't. You probably thank them for it. It seems to me that it's similar in dogs -- occasional, just punishment -- helps them learn boundaries.


Like I said before you have a great perspective that is balanced,fair,and you get results.you back up your ideas with well thought and concise explanations that everyone can understand,well almost everyone.You put my exact thoughts into the words for me.Great post!


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

selzer said:


> Who corrects a puppy with a treat???
> 
> I generally give my bitches a way away from their brood, so they do not have to get nasty with them, they just leap over the side of the whelping box or over the x-pen when they need to get out of there for a spell.


 So I take it you are a breeder? You have a lovely bitch and pups in the picture.Do you have a kennel?Kennel name or web site?Do you show at all?


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

*acero and oso alpha rolling for fun*


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

acero uses her mouth to grab his scruff and and her front feet to grab,push and roll him over.I mean oso doesn't look terrified to be rolled in this case and thats the same kinda of relationship you should have with your dog.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

Where was the alpha rolling in those videos? I didn't see any. I saw the clearly "alpha" dog get on it's back once voluntarily to play with the puppy.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

gsdraven said:


> Where was the alpha rolling in those videos? I didn't see any. I saw the clearly "alpha" dog get on it's back once voluntarily to play with the puppy.


yup...that's what I see too.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

BowWowMeow said:


> And just wanted to add that I've had fosters and adopted dogs who people considered really tough, difficult to train (and even dangerous) dogs. In no cases was it ever necessary to alpha roll or physically dominate those dogs.
> 
> And when I used to do that stuff to my dogs it really did make me feel sick to see the fear in their eyes. Why do people want their dogs to fear them????? That's not true respect.


 Oso does not look terrified in this clip but he is being playful manipulated and rolled onto his back.not all alpha rolls are bad and not all alpha rolls are good either.its how you use the method and use it in an effective manner without harmful intent behind,rather use it to be kind for the future relationship between you and your dog.
Now if someone were to say I use a crowbar to beat my dog into submission...........well then ya know its obvious what, hopefully, all people on here would say and do.Keep an open mind and try to see other peoples perspectives.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

gsdraven said:


> Where was the alpha rolling in those videos? I didn't see any. I saw the clearly "alpha" dog get on it's back once voluntarily to play with the puppy.


the dog that you deemed the alpha is not the large dog.just because he's larger does not mean he's pack boss here.I am the leader first and foremost or "alpha" as some say.Then the kids and husband.Then ranking second is Acero by far.She bosses OSO around night and day.Oso always lets her go first when it comes to food,going out you name it.Then keeno ranks at the bottom of the totem pole.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

jax08 said:


> yup...that's what i see too.


i thought you put the ignore button on my posts and bs???


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> yup...that's what I see too.


I swear you guys tag team.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

gsdraven said:


> Where was the alpha rolling in those videos? I didn't see any. I saw the clearly "alpha" dog get on it's back once voluntarily to play with the puppy.


I swear you guys tag team.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

tierra nuestra said:


> acero uses her mouth to grab his scruff and and her front feet to grab,push and roll him over.I mean oso doesn't look terrified to be rolled in this case and thats the same kinda of relationship you should have with your dog.


I'm sorry but I just don't see this happening in the video you posted. Oso cleary rolled over on his own.

The reason I say Oso is "alpha" is because he is obviously controlling the play in the video you posted. He tolerates Acero biting at him but only engages when he wants to and moves away when he doesn't.

I also don't buy into the whole "alpha" theory and especially don't agree with including humans into a pack heirachy which is why I put "alpha" in quotes. In the videos you posted, I see that Oso is in control.


----------



## Denali Girl (Nov 20, 2010)

I wish I took a video of my pup and her sister playing yesterday. Next week I will take a video and post it. If anyone saw them that didn't know about dogs they would think they were killing each other. From what I saw, it was my pup that was on her back most of the time but she went there on her own. There was times that my dog would "steamroller" her sister and put her on her back but it was few and far between.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Here is my view, with limited experience...

I don't need to be "alpha" in the "pack". My dog knows I'm not a dog so I'm not going to fool her into thinking I'm one. She knows where her bread and butter comes from. I train her to relate good things coming her way to me. If I don't like a behavior, I train it out of her.

I don't need to roll and pin my dog. She's sensitive enough to my moods and tone. She's not one that likes submissive positions or to be restrained. I don't feel the need to be in "control" to the point of harming the relationship with her. And if I did roll her over, she would just think she was getting a belly rub.

Alpha rolling is outdated. There are new studies out that prove wolves don't alpha roll unless they plan on killing the opponent. 

My take on the videos shown is the same as Jamie's and Ruth's. Those dogs in the video were playing. When my dogs are playing Jax will roll over onto to her back. I've never seen any of my dogs "alpha" roll to show their dominance. 

And my last opinion, with limited experience...is that not one person will completely agree on small training points, let alone a large one like this.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> Here is my view, with limited experience...
> 
> I don't need to be "alpha" in the "pack". My dog knows I'm not a dog so I'm not going to fool her into thinking I'm one. She knows where her bread and butter comes from. I train her to relate good things coming her way to me. If I don't like a behavior, I train it out of her.
> 
> ...


 I'd love to see a video of you and your dogs relationship.It would be intresting to see your approach to training and see the results.And yes they are playing in the video as it clearly states but Acero is trying to assert herself over oso even while playing.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

gsdraven said:


> I'm sorry but I just don't see this happening in the video you posted. Oso cleary rolled over on his own.
> 
> The reason I say Oso is "alpha" is because he is obviously controlling the play in the video you posted. He tolerates Acero biting at him but only engages when he wants to and moves away when he doesn't.
> 
> I also don't buy into the whole "alpha" theory and especially don't agree with including humans into a pack heirachy which is why I put "alpha" in quotes. In the videos you posted, I see that Oso is in control.


Your views on things become very clear when you are willing to tell a complete stranger that they do not know their own dogs behaviours but obviously from a short clip you do.you are willing to "inform" me what is and is not about dogs you have never personally met.Even though I tried to tell you that I know who is the dominant dog in the heirarchy here.As i said before you reveal alot about yourself in the post.I also know that Oso submits to her willingly without fuss(the reason he rolls so easily) and lets her climb on top of him.If he was the true dominant dog he would never let another dog get on top even in play.As I quoted to jax08,you guys should post videos of your own methods and dogs in action.It would be intresting to see other peoples methods at work and how they apply them.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

tierra nuestra said:


> Your views on things become very clear when you are willing to tell a complete stranger that they do not know their own dogs behaviours but obviously from a short clip you do. You are willing to "inform" me what is and is not about dogs you have never personally met. Even though I tried to tell you that I know who is the dominant dog in the heirarchy here. As i said before you reveal alot about yourself in the post. I also know that Oso submits to her willingly without fuss(the reason he rolls so easily) and lets her climb on top of him. If he was the true dominant dog he would never let another dog get on top even in play.


 (quote adjusted for formatting but not content)

For the record, I did not state that you do not know your own dogs behavior nor did I attempt to "inform" you of what your dogs are or are no. 

I did however give my opinion on what I see about the behavior exhibited in the video that you posted of two dogs playing. I still maintain that I see no dominating, submitting or alpha rolling going on in those videos. I do see normal dog play in which one dog is clearly the one in control of the play.

I did make my views on the behavior in that video very clear and revealed my thoughts on the behavior exhibit. Nothing else can be inferred other than what I have obviously stated.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

tierra nuestra said:


> I'd love to see a video of you and your dogs relationship.It would be intresting to see your approach to training and see the results.And yes they are playing in the video as it clearly states but Acero is trying to assert herself over oso even while playing.


You mean the positive approach where she WANTS to work? You mean the positive approach where she doesn't shut down from stress because I don't feel the need to dominate her? You mean the positive approach taught to me by someone whose titled dogs in obedience, the vice president of the local Schutzhund club and who has a high level degree in animal behavior? That approach? You've never seen anyone train their dogs without rolling them?

You apparently have way more time on your hands than I do. So feel free to post a video showing how YOU train.


----------



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

tierra nuestra said:


> If he was the true dominant dog he would never let another dog get on top even in play.


Baloney. Play between dogs in the same home who are part of the same pack and who get along well don't tend to have rigid rules like that. In our house it's very clear that Halo rules the roost - she's got Keefer, who is 3 years older and 20 pounds heavier, wrapped around her fuzzy little paw. But he humps her, she rolls onto her back in play, and not only does she allow him to stand over her she actually puts herself there by walking underneath him and sitting down, and diving under his belly to bite at his legs. But she's still the boss.


----------



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

Here are my dogs playing:


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Keefer CRACKS me up! He's like "Yeah...I'll get you on the way back when you're dizzy and disorientated"


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

:wub: Halo. She has so much personality.


----------



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

Great article: http://www.4pawsu.com/alpharoll.pdf


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> You mean the positive approach where she WANTS to work? You mean the positive approach where she doesn't shut down from stress because I don't feel the need to dominate her? You mean the positive approach taught to me by someone whose titled dogs in obedience, the vice president of the local Schutzhund club and who has a high level degree in animal behavior? That approach? You've never seen anyone train their dogs without rolling them?
> 
> You apparently have way more time on your hands than I do. So feel free to post a video showing how YOU train.


 yes,i'd really like to see how your methods work.I MEAN YOU ARE OVERLY CRITICAL OF MY POSTS AND THE METHODS I USE,so i wouldn't mind seeing your perspective.I'm not the one critising your methods,you are always critising mine.I figure since you have so much to say about all this in a negative manner then hey,maybe I Should see thse results that you speak so highly of.Seriously.as for time on my hands,i really do not have that much but try to use it wisely in an efficient manner.i already posted a video that 2 of you jumped on right away in a nasty manner,so the balls in your court.


----------



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

gsdraven said:


> :wub: Halo. She has so much personality.


She DOES - that's what makes the little snot so much fun, lol! She's totally in control, she instigates the play, and you can see she's trying her darndest to get him to chase her around the table. She only succeeds a couple of times, in spite of her best efforts.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

tierra nuestra said:


> i already posted a video that 2 of you jumped on right away in a nasty manner,so the balls in your court.


I'm sorry you felt that way. I don't believe that either one of us were nasty. I know that I certainly wasn't trying to be. Just wanted to share my observations in hopes that we could all learn about dog behavior together through productive discussion.


----------



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

I wonder if part of the problem here is that some people don't know exactly what an alpha roll IS? Pack members rolling around together is play, they're not trying to dominate each other. Hence, by definition, that's not an alpha roll, even if one of them ends up rolled under the other because there's no intent to dominate or be "alpha", they're just having fun.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Baloney. Play between dogs in the same home who are part of the same pack and who get along well don't tend to have rigid rules like that. In our house it's very clear that Halo rules the roost - she's got Keefer, who is 3 years older and 20 pounds heavier, wrapped around her fuzzy little paw. But he humps her, she rolls onto her back in play, and not only does she allow him to stand over her she actually puts herself there by walking underneath him and sitting down, and diving under his belly to bite at his legs. But she's still the boss.


 Thats why i said the true dominant dog.I believe that in a well run household with obiedient dogs they see you as the true dominant one or pack boss.If it were a pack of wild dogs that would never happen.not wolves here but wild or feral dog pack.Acero is just a baby compareds to oso but she is the dominant one out of them.sigh.time to go out a finish forking out stalls and bottle feed some lambs.my toes have thawed enough to stop yacking on here.:laugh:


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

gsdraven said:


> I'm sorry you felt that way. I don't believe that either one of us were nasty. I know that I certainly wasn't trying to be. Just wanted to share my observations in hopes that we could all learn about dog behavior together through productive discussion.


thanks for that.but since jax08 post about my BS because of caps it seems that way with her anyways.but again thanks for the explanation.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

tierra nuestra said:


> yes,i'd really like to see how your methods work.I MEAN YOU ARE OVERLY CRITICAL OF MY POSTS AND THE METHODS I USE,so i wouldn't mind seeing your perspective.I'm not the one critising your methods,you are always critising mine.I figure since you have so much to say about all this in a negative manner then hey,maybe I Should see thse results that you speak so highly of.Seriously.as for time on my hands,i really do not have that much but try to use it wisely in an efficient manner.i already posted a video that 2 of you jumped on right away in a nasty manner,so the balls in your court.


First, nobody was nasty about your video. All we said it looked like they were playing and we didn't see an alpha roll.

Second, just because we disagree with you does not mean you need to get nasty. Yes. It's you being nasty. Not us.

Third, why are you being so over emotional about a subject that obviously people are going to disagree about. Nobody was attacking you in any way, yet you've chosen to take it personally.

Fourth, I have a right to my opinion just as you do. My opinion is that I don't need to roll my dog to be the alpha. In two years of using dominant training methods I got nowhere. In three weeks of using positive methods, I had a dog healing like a champ. Get a grip. Calm down. Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean we've hired a hit on you. There is more than one way to train. You stick you yours and I'll stick to mine.

Fifth, your video didn't show any kind of training. It showed a couple of dogs playing.

Last, oh yeah...this nonsense is why I was ignoring your posts to begin with. :wild:


----------



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

Well, I don't think there are all that many "true dominant dogs". Much of the behavior that's attributed to dominance is grossly mislabeled, and is no such thing. Dominance theory is one of those myths that just won't die, and has unfortunately been resurrected by Cesar Milan to the point that many people think that every time their dog doesn't do something, it's willfully disobeying because it's trying to be top dog. And needs to be alpha rolled to show it who's boss.  

A dog that is _truly_ dominant over other dogs probably wouldn't be safe left loose even around his own packmates, much less roll around on the ground with them in play.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I wonder if part of the problem here is that some people don't know exactly what an alpha roll IS? Pack members rolling around together is play, they're not trying to dominate each other. Hence, by definition, that's not an alpha roll, even if one of them ends up rolled under the other because there's no intent to dominate or be "alpha", they're just having fun.


That is what I'm getting from this conversation. Words are tricky. What means something to me and you means something different to others.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I wonder if part of the problem here is that some people don't know exactly what an alpha roll IS? Pack members rolling around together is play, they're not trying to dominate each other. Hence, by definition, that's not an alpha roll, even if one of them ends up rolled under the other because there's no intent to dominate or be "alpha", they're just having fun.


its subtle but its there.Acero is playing yes but at the same time she's giving off body signals that says 'I'm testing to see how far I can get while still being a pain in the ass" i know its not a full out scruff and roar your dead roll but she's learning as a puppy will.Oso has put his foot on her back when they were not playing and she swung around and snapped.I caught her look and I gave her the look to knock it off with a short "AT!!!!" and she backed off and settled down.I love to just watch them and their weird little traits.it helps alot to understand them more.


----------



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

Did you read the article I posted? 



> Klinghammer notes that the preferred strategy of one wolf establishing dominance over another is
> “usually a drawn-out series of encounters that eventually convinces a wolf to submit and run
> away.” In fact, says Ken McCort, a dog training and behavior consultant, “with wolves the inguinal
> presentation behavior is usually volunteered by a lower ranking wolf as sort of an appeasement to a
> ...


When your dogs are playing is there a threat or an altercation? Or are they just having fun, and occasionally communicating that the other dog went to far or is about to, and should back off? 

You accuse others of not being open minded enough to accept what you say, but have you entertained the thought that you might be wrong? That you're misinterpreting your dogs' behavior, or misusing terminology?


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

:thumbup::thumbup:


Cassidy's Mom said:


> Here are my dogs playing:
> 
> YouTube - Smackdown: Halo vs Keefer


----------



## ayoitzrimz (Apr 14, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> I wonder if part of the problem here is that some people don't know exactly what an alpha roll IS? Pack members rolling around together is play, they're not trying to dominate each other. Hence, by definition, that's not an alpha roll, even if one of them ends up rolled under the other because there's no intent to dominate or be "alpha", they're just having fun.


Completely agree!! I think people are getting a little confused. When dogs play and roll each other on their backs (or as in the video posted earlier, one of the dogs will voluntarily take the submissive position for the other dog to get on top) is not the same as an owner pinning their dog to the ground until the dog submits. What we are talking about here is FORCIBLY putting a dog on his back in order to get some sort of "submission" out of him. I roll my dog over all the time, but its only for belly rubs. He plays with other dogs and they rotate around with one dog on his back and the other on top. That's NOT what we mean when we say "alpha rolling a dog".


----------



## atravis (Sep 24, 2008)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Well, I don't think there are all that many "true dominant dogs". Much of the behavior that's attributed to dominance is grossly mislabeled, and is no such thing. Dominance theory is one of those myths that just won't die, and has unfortunately been resurrected by Cesar Milan to the point that many people think that every time their dog doesn't do something, it's willfully disobeying because it's trying to be top dog. And needs to be alpha rolled to show it who's boss.
> 
> A dog that is _truly_ dominant over other dogs probably wouldn't be safe left loose even around his own packmates, much less roll around on the ground with them in play.


:groovy:

Just wanted to agree with this!

Isn't it funny, that the man who originally proposed "alpha" theory (David Mech), has since gone back and fully retracted his previous findings, citing that they were completely wrong?

And yet people still believe them! Its madness! 






Though I will say I disagree somewhat on your "true" dominance opinion. I consider dominance more like a state of mind. A "dominant" individual, to me, is less of an animal that is constantly trying to climb some imaginary hierarchy, or an animal that is uncontrollably aggressive, so much as it is an animal that is EXTREMELY self secure, very aware of its space and presence, and isn't apt to being manipulated by outside forces. A not-always biddable dog, who is very likely to take charge of a situation without consent from the owner. When I think of a "dominant" dog, I think of an Akita, or a Neo Mastiff. Not crazy uncontrollable dogs, but dogs who are very (VERY) commanding in general presence, and will act when _they_ feel action is needed. 

But that's just my personal opinion :laugh:


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Cassidy's Mom said:


> Did you read the article I posted?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 thats the thing we may all be wrong or we may all be right.just for the record,at the top of the video it states clearly playful alpha rolling.I know that this is not a real drawn out roll to the death.in the clip it show acero playfully using both feet to pull oso over and in others oso rolls willingly but is not threatned by her behaviour because he sees no threat in her intentions.But,aceros intentions are there none the less that she is learning to dominate oso in small stages.she's pushing to see how far she can get.at this stage they are having fun but are also learning and taking in new things.
I believe Dogs do not think in their mind that they feel like going out and having fun.I believe in instinct and that what oso and acero are doing is related to practicing and honing life saving skills that would be beneficial to them to survive.We attribute human emotions to animals far to often and end up witha big mess and scratch our heads wondering why animals don't understand what you are asking of them.
I do believe i know my dogs best when it come to related behaviors.And since my dogs listen well and respect me and vice versa and I really do not have issues with them,then why would i start questioning if I may be wrong?I do not demand that other people see my views and apply them to their dogs.I state what I see and thats it.It would be entirley different with the rolling if I was demanding and telling everyone else that their method won't work or that they are cruel or inhumane.I have been in a deffensive mode since this thread started.Not once have I stated their methods are wrong or inhumane somehow.I agree everyone has a right to their own perspective but i do not have to jump on the band wagon with them.I see many thread i disagree with and I may mention my approach but I never state they are wrong or need a better way
.AND YOU KNOW SOMETIMES TALK IS CHEAP TOO.I see alot of advice but every once in awhile you like to know its coming from a valueable and believeable source.I CAME ON HERE TO LEARN.To see other peoples ideas and approaches,to keep an open mind because I want to be the best owner I can be.and yes,with the right thread offer some advice that I have had first hand experiencing and give my view to be helpful to other owners.But I have run into a few posts that started a run of bad feelings and tension.And topics end up being way off the topic because of it.


----------



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

tierra nuestra said:


> I see alot of advice but every once in awhile you like to know its coming from a valueable and believeable source.


We have a ton of new members who just joined this year, after the board was sold, but there are still people who have been here for a long time, and they have years of history that you can read if you want to know more about them - all you have to do is click on their username to the left of their posts and in the drop down box select "find all posts by______". 

I've posted lots of pictures of my dogs, and videos too, and have talked a lot about the training I've done with them. In this thread for example, I discuss the foundation training I did with Halo from the time she was a puppy: http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...sweet-calm-5-month-old-puppy-out-control.html

To see their threads you can go to their profile, click on "statistics" and select "find all threads started by_______".

I understand your point, and it's a valid one, but there's a lot of information here about everybody who's been actively posting for awhile, you just need to know where to look for it.


----------



## Heagler870 (Jun 27, 2009)

Cassidy'smom! Your video killed me! It was so cute when the dog was running around the table wanting the other to chase him/her. Sorry, not sure which one was which.


----------



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

Halo is the little sable girl who was running circles around the table, Keefer is the black and red boy she was trying to incite! :rofl: Those two make me laugh every day. :wub:

It's interesting, because if you don't know the dynamic between the two of them and only watched this video you might think that he's getting the better of her, especially when she's on the floor underneath him, but you'd be completely wrong. She is more than a match for him and has been since the time she was a puppy. We used to watch them together when she was 1/4 his size, and comment to each other "she's going to kick his *** some day". :wild: Good thing he's so patient with her antics, or it could have been ugly!


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

cassidy's mom said:


> we have a ton of new members who just joined this year, after the board was sold, but there are still people who have been here for a long time, and they have years of history that you can read if you want to know more about them - all you have to do is click on their username to the left of their posts and in the drop down box select "find all posts by______".
> 
> I've posted lots of pictures of my dogs, and videos too, and have talked a lot about the training i've done with them. In this thread for example, i discuss the foundation training i did with halo from the time she was a puppy: http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...sweet-calm-5-month-old-puppy-out-control.html
> 
> ...


thanks for the info and will do.cheers for now and i guess we'RE close enough TO THE 25 to say "i hope you have a merry xmas!"


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> .......................
> And my last opinion, with limited experience...is that not one person will completely agree on small training points, let alone a large one like this.


Ain't that the truth!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

atravis said:


> .....................................
> 
> ............. so much as it is an animal that is EXTREMELY self secure, very aware of its space and presence, and isn't apt to being manipulated by outside forces. A not-always biddable dog, who is very likely to take charge of a situation without consent from the owner. When I think of a "dominant" dog, I think of an Akita, or a Neo Mastiff. Not crazy uncontrollable dogs, but dogs who are very (VERY) commanding in general presence, and will act when _they_ feel action is needed......


Very true about very self confident dogs - but I don't think it is a breed thing - more of an individual dog thing although it might be more common in some breeds.

I have a male GSD (3yo) that is like that. A little DA aggressive at times but not bad and is by far the most self confident and independent dog i have ever owned or even seen. the animal behaviorist we consult with called him the "most self confident dog that she has ever came across". And she likes him very much! The breeder that we got him fromhas a Saturday class that a lot of her customers come to each week - she has told me that it seems like Baron considers all of these dogs HIS pack and that he is in charge.

It is very interesting to own such a dog, believe me. We have had many "discussions" on who is in charge over the last 3 years! He is a sweetheart most of the time!


----------

