# How quickly does a dog learn?



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

So I've been trying to put a voice command to down for the last... 20 or so short sessions.

Porsche knows the voice command for sit reliably, and she knows the gesture for down. So I've been doing short, 5 minute sessions of sit-down-sit-down. I'll tell her sit, she'll sit. Then I say down, wait 2-3 seconds, then do gesture. She lays down at the gesture.

We're about 20 sessions in, and I do not yet see any progress towards understanding the word "down". Is that normal? Am I doing something wrong?

Also she is showing signs of being totally bored of repeating that training session over and over. High value treats are losing their value...


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

It depends on the dog, some pick things up very quickly, and some take more time and more repetition to get it. 

Have you tried waiting a bit longer between the verbal and hand signal and see if she offers the down? If so, jackpot and freak out!

If you do hand signal and verbal cue too closely together she might associate -both together- as the cue for down, if that makes sense.

Also keep in mind that going to strictly verbal cues is never easy, it's not unusual at all for dogs to have trouble with it.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

I've waited up to 5 seconds, and all that happens is that she loses interest and starts looking around at what the cat is doing or whatever else is around in the environment. But I'll try for longer and see if that works.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

How are you teaching her the down?

Usually for any new command this is how I teach them:
1. Mark and reward for wanted behavior. Typically I use a lure or a target.
2. Once the dog is consistently repeating the behavior, I attach a vocal/signaled command. I give the command once, wait (counting to five slowly), and then use whatever lure/movement was used to have the dog display the behavior. Repeat and eventually wait it out longer until the dog figures out command --> behavior instead of command --> lure --> behavior.

Does that make sense? In reality a lot of the times it just gets messier than that because I start fading the lure and that eventually becomes the natural hand signal, and then from there I attach the vocal command.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Thats basically what I'm doing, without waiting her out. I didn't know you have to increase the time you wait.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Alla said:


> Thats basically what I'm doing, without waiting her out. I didn't know you have to increase the time you wait.


Yeah let her think for herself  If she's getting bored and looking around it means either the reward is not good enough for her to want to work, or you're asking for too much too fast.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

taquitos said:


> Yeah let her think for herself  If she's getting bored and looking around it means either the reward is not good enough for her to want to work, or you're asking for too much too fast.


To add to this, you may also need to be more engaging and fun to work with. Upbeat, happy voice, move around, etc. (Not a criticism on YOU saying you aren't fun, but sometimes you need to act like an idiot to keep a dog engaged, haha)

Another thing I thought of was the length of the training session. In general I find more frequent short sessions are better than longer ones. End it while she is still engaged and leave her wanting to do more, instead of continuing on until she's bored and done with it.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

ireth0 said:


> To add to this, you may also need to be more engaging and fun to work with. Upbeat, happy voice, move around, etc. (Not a criticism on YOU saying you aren't fun, but sometimes you need to act like an idiot to keep a dog engaged, haha)
> 
> Another thing I thought of was the length of the training session. In general I find more frequent short sessions are better than longer ones. End it while she is still engaged and leave her wanting to do more, instead of continuing on until she's bored and done with it.


This is a really good point. Some dogs have a really low tolerance for frustration. My last dog liked training for the sake of training and was always ready to try something else. My current dog will give up pretty much immediately if he doesn't get it right away. I keep sessions really short and I start and end on something I know he can do, even if it's just recognizing his name.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

And I'm going to add something a little bit controversial? If she's getting bored, mix it up and do something else. Teach her something else between repetitions, add a third thing into the mix, and don't worry so much about getting down on a verbal before moving on. She'll pick it up, but she'll pick it up faster if she isn't bored out of her skull OR able to eventually predict that down comes after sit and giving it to you just to move on.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

> So I've been doing short, 5 minute sessions of sit-down-sit-down. I'll tell her sit, she'll sit. Then I say down, wait 2-3 seconds, then do gesture. She lays down at the gesture.


Not a fan of puppy pushups, especially during the teaching phase. I would teach sit and down entirely separately from each other, and with a release cue as well. That way it'll be easier to extend duration when the time comes.



> Also she is showing signs of being totally bored of repeating that training session over and over.


Well yeah, lol. I'd be bored too of 5 minutes of sit down sit down sit down sit down sit down sit down sit down. You get my point. So. Three to five reps of down / reward / release max ... and it's time for some spirited play, some fetch, or tug, or run and get extra special treats from kitchen or other area. Briefly. Then quickly go back to original training spot and do three to five reps of sit / reward / release. A few cycles of that, perhaps show your dog your empty hands or whatever, and you're done until the next session.



> I've waited up to 5 seconds, and all that happens is that she loses interest and starts looking around at what the cat is doing or whatever else is around in the environment.


Either practice in a distraction-free environment, or teach your dog attention as a separate exercise. I'd probably go with attention as separate exercise adding distraction gradually, but that's a whole new can of worms I suppose.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

I honestly think my rewards are just not up to par... I took all the advice here and did another session at lunch, and she reacted completely the same to the chicken and the kibble, i.e. she'll take it if offered, but not particularly excited to do so.

Need to find something else interesting... Tried cold cuts, kibble, cheese, chicken, dog treats. Same response to everything nowadays. When we first got her she would differentiate between the different rewards, i.e. be super excited about chicken, but now, doesn't really care... 

There was one point where I totally thought she got it - i.e. she laid down immediately upon hearing the word, twice in a row. I made a huge deal out of it and fed her jackpot both times. After those two times though, nothing. Still sitting and staring at me for 10+ seconds, then reacting to gesture.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

It is possible for the dog to burn out on treats - or just not be that interested in food, or to burn out on the *exercise*, to a degree that it doesn't matter if you're waving steak under their nose, if they're bored and done and it's not fun, they are DONE.

If she's got it and does it, don't keep drilling it. There are very, very, few dogs who will tolerate being drilled and even fewer who will do it happily no matter what you are feeding them for it. If she knows it and does it *move on*. Play a game, take a break, teach her something else, and just add it into a growing rotation of things you asked for (growing as you teach more new stuff).


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

My big dog hates the lay down command. If he's amped up and having fun, he'll do it snappily, but just in the normal course of events when you ask for a "down" he lets out this huuuuuge melodramatic sigh and sloooowly slides down to the ground. 

He'll happily do much more complicated commands, and he's not achey, so IDK. Just doesn't like down. 

If she's just sick of it, asking for it more won't make her less sick of it, lol.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Find a new "high value" treat.....it's a GSD and should learn a "down" in very little time. Incorporate hand signals. Do you use a marker for proper behavior ? If so, is it followed up within a second or so of a reward..not necessarily a food scrap, might be whatever lure your Porsche digs the most. Separating the body gesture and verbal command is confusing...as well as basically asking the dog twice. Do the basic 101 training, bait the dog to the down position with the lure and some physical assistance as well. The moment the dog is down, use your marker and then the reward. The timing of your marker is significant. A German Shepherd of Porsche's age should learn a "down" in 5 - 10 properly coordinated efforts. They are smart dogs.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

CptJack said:


> It is possible for the dog to burn out on treats - or just not be that interested in food, or to burn out on the *exercise*, to a degree that it doesn't matter if you're waving steak under their nose, if they're bored and done and it's not fun, they are DONE.
> 
> If she's got it and does it, don't keep drilling it. There are very, very, few dogs who will tolerate being drilled and even fewer who will do it happily no matter what you are feeding them for it. If she knows it and does it *move on*. Play a game, take a break, teach her something else, and just add it into a growing rotation of things you asked for (growing as you teach more new stuff).


I'm so spoiled, Jubel will do anything for food. All I have to do is get him to understand what I want. I always get bored before he does. New stuff, old stuff doesn't matter. If food lady is paying out treats he will happily keep doing whatever I ask. He doesn't even really get frustrated when he doesn't know what I want just keeps trying. Of course I do my best to avoid setting the reward threshold to high.

As to the OP I agree with mixing it up, doing lots of different things. Don't just focus on one thing for days at a time. When I'm adding a verbal cue to a command I pair the hand signal with the verbal cue for days before even trying to get a response from just the verbal. Paired as in saying the word at the same time as I give the signal, the slowly start giving the verbal before I start the hand signal. The space between the verbal and hand signal gradually grows by the time the gap is somewhat significant they usually start making the connection.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Getting a dog to do "anything" for food, should only be used when the dog is learning the behavior. Once the dog has learned the behavior, one needs to fade the reward, otherwise the dog is only doing what it is commanded to do for a piece of food or other insignificant reward. The dog should obey you without a bait dangled in front of its face. All one has taught a dog by shoveling treats in it's face to obey is to disregard the human and only work for the bribe. I also do not understand why one would want a gap to develop between the verbal command and hand signal, they should occur at the same exact time, otherwise it will confuse the dog into thinking both the verbal command and hand signal are required to issue the command.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

I would warm her up by doing a few reps with the gesture to get her to lie down. Reward when she is lying down. Then after a few reps she should know what you are doing. Give the command, then wait. Give her 30 seconds to think about it. 2-3 seconds isn't enough time for a dog to think about it, and if she's used to you helping her by using a gesture, she will never do it without the gesture. You need to give her enough time to actually think about it and become impatient for the treat. As soon as she goes down on her own, reward in position. I would expect a dog to get this within 5-10 reps.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Fading a lure and "fading" the reinforcement/reward are two different things. Yes, fade the lure quickly. The switch to an intermittent reinforcement schedule should not be done too quickly. As an aside, I don't think Dagwall meant she was luring her dog with food, just that when Jubel knows it's training time, he's on his game. 

For switching from hand signal to verbal cue, this has been my experience: Spend what seems like forever pairing/spacing the hand and verbal cues. Spend an eternity continuing to pair/space and wonder what I'm doing wrong. Cry. Try again. Sob. Try again. <if I drank, here would be the time> Try again. Click!!! Like magic, the dog seems to suddenly get it. 

I really don't know what happens, but sometimes it seems as though a switch has been flipped and they just get it.

Good luck! You're doing great with Porsche.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

K9 3X said:


> Getting a dog to do "anything" for food, should only be used when the dog is learning the behavior. Once the dog has learned the behavior, one needs to fade the reward, otherwise the dog is only doing what it is commanded to do for a piece of food or other insignificant reward. The dog should obey you without a bait dangled in front of its face. All one has taught a dog by shoveling treats in it's face to obey is to disregard the human and only work for the bribe. I also do not understand why one would want a gap to develop between the verbal command and hand signal, they should occur at the same exact time, otherwise it will confuse the dog into thinking both the verbal command and hand signal are required to issue the command.


There's a gap to help the dog understand the cue is not both verbal and signaled at the same time. A dog who understand hand signals more easily (which is the case for about 90% of dogs) is not going to "hear" what you're saying if you're giving the hand signal at the same time. By saying and signaling at the same time all you're doing is just teaching the dog to ignore your voice. You give a gap between the two to help the dog understand the chain of signals so that eventually you can take out the "middle piece" (i.e. hand signal) so that all that is necessary is a verbal command.

Everyone knows to fade the reward. A reward also is not "dangled" in front of the face (that would be the lure , or it would be bribing if you're showing him the "reward" to convince the dog to do anything). That you fade as quickly as possible.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

taquitos said:


> There's a gap to help the dog understand the cue is not both verbal and signaled at the same time. A dog who understand hand signals more easily (which is the case for about 90% of dogs) is not going to "hear" what you're saying if you're giving the hand signal at the same time. By saying and signaling at the same time all you're doing is just teaching the dog to ignore your voice. *You give a gap between the two to help the dog understand the chain of signals so that eventually you can take out the "middle piece" (i.e. hand signal) so that all that is necessary is a verbal command.*


This. Or in a word, anticipation.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

taquitos said:


> There's a gap to help the dog understand the cue is not both verbal and signaled at the same time. A dog who understand hand signals more easily (which is the case for about 90% of dogs) is not going to "hear" what you're saying if you're giving the hand signal at the same time. By saying and signaling at the same time all you're doing is just teaching the dog to ignore your voice. You give a gap between the two to help the dog understand the chain of signals so that eventually you can take out the "middle piece" (i.e. hand signal) so that all that is necessary is a verbal command.
> 
> Everyone knows to fade the reward. A reward also is not "dangled" in front of the face (that would be the lure , or it would be bribing if you're showing him the "reward" to convince the dog to do anything). That you fade as quickly as possible.


I don't understand this approach whatsoever. "chain of signals" ??? There is no "chain of signals" in many a simple obedience command, why confuse the dog? A sit ( in my case) is a closed fist. Both the verbal "sit" command and closed fist command were taught simultaneously and the dog sat. Once the connection is made, the dog will sit regardless, whether I say "sit" or show a closed fist. If I left a gap between the two commands, I effectively am teaching the dog the command is a 2 part sequence, one being dependent on the other, which would be confusing but certainly doable. I usually remove the verbal command and issue hand signals or body postures to communicate to the dog but on occasion will use verbal commands.

A reward is "dangled" in front of their face as long as it is something the dog can smell. They know you have the reward on you and they are working for the reward. The only variable regarding a reward which is not discernible to the dog's senses is praise and using other engagement techniques as the reward. Dog certainly knows if you have a tug toy in your pocket during training sessions, it does not need to be visible, the dog knows it's there. The dog's anticipation of being rewarded is what the handler is utilizing but still a bribe of sorts. You cannot fade a dog's sense of smell hence whether it is visible or hidden the dog knows you have the reward it seeks.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Oh, one other thing I forgot and perhaps someone else has mentioned this to the OP. A down is a submissive position for a dog to be commanded to execute. Never had a problem teaching a dog a down but it might be a consideration for the OP to consider.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

K9 3X said:


> I don't understand this approach whatsoever. "chain of signals" ??? There is no "chain of signals" in many a simple obedience command, why confuse the dog? A sit ( in my case) is a closed fist. Both the verbal "sit" command and closed fist command were taught simultaneously and the dog sat. Once the connection is made, the dog will sit regardless, whether I say "sit" or show a closed fist. If I left a gap between the two commands, I effectively am teaching the dog the command is a 2 part sequence, one being dependent on the other, which would be confusing but certainly doable. I usually remove the verbal command and issue hand signals or body postures to communicate to the dog but on occasion will use verbal commands.
> 
> A reward is "dangled" in front of their face as long as it is something the dog can smell. They know you have the reward on you and they are working for the reward. The only variable regarding a reward which is not discernible to the dog's senses is praise and using other engagement techniques as the reward. Dog certainly knows if you have a tug toy in your pocket during training sessions, it does not need to be visible, the dog knows it's there. The dog's anticipation of being rewarded is what the handler is utilizing but still a bribe of sorts. You cannot fade a dog's sense of smell hence whether it is visible or hidden the dog knows you have the reward it seeks.


It's basic clicker training theory. Most dogs do not understand that both separately mean the same thing. Dogs who are visually oriented will not be listening for the sound, they will be watching your hand. I made that pretty clear in my post  It's not a repeat -- the poster's dog clearly did not understand that "down" and the hand signal for "down" is not the same (hence why the dog did not respond even after 10 seconds). You ARE teaching that it is a two-part sequence. The dog ANTICIPATES the second part after enough reinforcement and will react immediately. How do you think LAT training works for reactivity? It's the same exact principle. You mark and reward for the anticipation.

I took your use of "dangle" quite literally which is why I thought you meant a LURE not a REWARD. And there are many other rewards the dog can not anticipate like being released after being recalled so that he can join his friends to play, being engaged in a game of tug, etc. praise does not work for some dogs (like mine  ) it has no value lol. You're not bribing because you are not using the treat consistently until the behavior always ends in a treat (which is what you were saying).

And if you haven't noticed already, this forum does not support or condone any dominance based theories on dog-human interactions because it's simply not true 

ETA:

Also, you might want to look up the idea of BACKCHAINING.

Just saying... multiple-part sequences are a very common thing to teach dogs when they are learning more advanced tricks.

And let me just add a blog post by Emily Larham AKA kikopup here as well
http://dogmantics.com/adding-a-verbal-cue-or-changing-a-cue/


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

taquitos said:


> It's basic clicker training theory. Most dogs do not understand that both separately mean the same thing. Dogs who are visually oriented will not be listening for the sound, they will be watching your hand. I made that pretty clear in my post  It's not a repeat -- the poster's dog clearly did not understand that "down" and the hand signal for "down" is not the same (hence why the dog did not respond even after 10 seconds). You ARE teaching that it is a two-part sequence. The dog ANTICIPATES the second part after enough reinforcement and will react immediately. How do you think LAT training works for reactivity? It's the same exact principle. You mark and reward for the anticipation.
> 
> I took your use of "dangle" quite literally which is why I thought you meant a LURE not a REWARD. And there are many other rewards the dog can not anticipate like being released after being recalled so that he can join his friends to play, being engaged in a game of tug, etc. praise does not work for some dogs (like mine  ) it has no value lol. You're not bribing because you are not using the treat consistently until the behavior always ends in a treat (which is what you were saying).
> 
> ...


"It's basic clicker training theory".....huh? Clicker training is simply an audible signal to mark the correct behavior. A verbal command of "down" followed by a hand signal is not remotely the same as the use of an audible marker....or a visual marker. 

" Most dogs do not understand that both separately mean the same thing." Well, I guess the GSD breed is an exception and yes, I noticed you used the word "most".

" How do you think LAT training works for reactivity? It's the same exact principle." So teaching a dog to learn a simple down is similar to reactivity? Come on, the dog is fearful of the down position? The two are totally different situations and treated differently obviously.

" You ARE teaching that it is a two-part sequence. The dog ANTICIPATES the second part after enough reinforcement and will react immediately." So, whichever command comes first, say the verbal "down" and then the dog executes after the hand signal is given. I get it, so the lesson is to not get the dog to execute per the verbal and anticipate the hand signal. Why would anyone set a dog up to be lazy on a verbal command by waiting to see the hand signal?

"And if you haven't noticed already, this forum does not support or condone any dominance based theories on dog-human interactions because it's simply not true" If this is in reference to my comment " A down is a submissive position for a dog to be commanded to execute." I once again have no idea what you mean. Dog posturing and body english is innate, and for some dogs a down position is a sign of submissiveness whether you agree or not.

And of course, more complex obedience skills require combinations of signals BUT each signal or verbal command is associated to a particular action and rare if ever does any one action require more than one command ( verbal or visual ).

I'm off to take the dog with me on a bike ride...her feet finally are properly on the pedals since I adjusted the seat.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

K9 3X said:


> "It's basic clicker training theory".....huh? Clicker training is simply an audible signal to mark the correct behavior. A verbal command of "down" followed by a hand signal is not remotely the same as the use of an audible marker....or a visual marker.
> 
> " Most dogs do not understand that both separately mean the same thing." Well, I guess the GSD breed is an exception and yes, I noticed you used the word "most".
> 
> ...


Breaking down training into itty bitty steps ensures success. That is why you make it a multi-part program. It's not simple for YOU, it is simpler for the dog. just sayin'.

And yes, you are lucky you have a GSD, a breed known for being smart, obedient and quick to learn.

All training operates on the same basic principles, regardless of the level of difficulty.

And no clicker training theory is not just about marking and rewarding lmao.

Anyway I'm done. I like how you've conveniently left out my explanations 

I'm sure OP has a good idea of what to do anyway after explanations given by DF members


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

The hand signal in question here is not a hand signal like a closed fist, where it is unrelated and totally dissimilar from the lure. It IS the lure, just a truncated abbreviation of it. When you're fading the lure and putting it onto verbal command, yes, you need there to be a pause wherein the dog engages it's own brain and thinks "I know what that word means! It means she's going to ask me to down!" and then the dog lies down and it gets it right and rewarded so it knows it got it right. 

The dog THINKING for itself and making an effort to get a treat, a toy, or praise from you is the point. You can teach down by doing things like physically manipulating the dog into position and then letting them know they got it right, but it is EXTREMELY limited and you will NEVER get complex behaviors if your dog is reliant on you to physically manipulate them into the proper action/position. The method itself, physically manipulating to start with/show the dog EVER, at all, is crude, ugly, and limiting. If you want a dog to sit/stay/come/heel, fine, but if you want a dog chaining behaviors together or engaging in behaviors you *can not* physically manipulate them into, you're just out of luck. 

The dog needs room to think and put the pieces together themselves or you're getting nowhere.

So, yeah, I'd say you're lucky you own GSDs who are both hard and smart. You'd either shut down other dogs or end up with dogs who didn't know ANYTHING because they'd been trained OUT of thinking.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> The hand signal in question here is not a hand signal like a closed fist, where it is unrelated and totally dissimilar from the lure. It IS the lure, just a truncated abbreviation of it. When you're fading the lure and putting it onto verbal command, yes, you need there to be a pause wherein the dog engages it's own brain and thinks "I know what that word means! It means she's going to ask me to down!" and then the dog lies down and it gets it right and rewarded so it knows it got it right.
> 
> The dog THINKING for itself and making an effort to get a treat, a toy, or praise from you is the point. You can teach down by doing things like physically manipulating the dog into position and then letting them know they got it right, but it is EXTREMELY limited and you will NEVER get complex behaviors if your dog is reliant on you to physically manipulate them into the proper action/position. The method itself, physically manipulating to start with/show the dog EVER, at all, is crude, ugly, and limiting. If you want a dog to sit/stay/come/heel, fine, but if you want a dog chaining behaviors together or engaging in behaviors you *can not* physically manipulate them into, you're just out of luck.
> 
> ...


 I appreciate your opinion and experiences you have had with your training procedures. I'm sure they have worked for you. Perhaps, it is the breed ( not sold on that 100% ) but I certainly have "physically" manipulated my current dog to improve on accuracy. I don't think some physical guidance to get a dog to understand what "tight" means is ruining a dog. The dog finds the proper positions and is duly notified. I have a feeling we are comparing apples to oranges.

Oh, all the hand signal methods you described, I have never dealt with or heard about, I have never heard of using the hand signal as lure. Shows you what I know about dog training. But, I think I can appreciate the methodology, creating focus, perhaps.

I teach a dog to react to either the hand signal or verbal command as quickly as the other, so I train that way. They are both commands.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

K9 3X said:


> A reward is "dangled" in front of their face as long as it is something the dog can smell. They know you have the reward on you and they are working for the reward. The only variable regarding a reward which is not discernible to the dog's senses is praise and using other engagement techniques as the reward. Dog certainly knows if you have a tug toy in your pocket during training sessions, it does not need to be visible, the dog knows it's there. The dog's anticipation of being rewarded is what the handler is utilizing but still a bribe of sorts. You cannot fade a dog's sense of smell hence whether it is visible or hidden the dog knows you have the reward it seeks.


 Far better that the dog understand you have little to offer but praise ???

See, the thing is. I WANT my dogs to think that a variety of rewards (of their choosing) are *somehow* / *potentially* available at all times. Whether those rewards eminate from my pocket, under my arm, from my mouth, or strictly from my sense of creativity for the moment ie: Premack, release to the environment, etc. Or even as I said before, having the rewards OFF of my body but hidden in a nearby location such as a cabinet drawer or the kitchen. In other words totally unpredictable.

Combine the above techniques, create a strong enough history of reinforcement, apply it on a variable schedule (this also helps to generate intensity and speed), and then the dog .. well .. he simply won't know exactly WHEN rewards are available or not, or for that matter WHERE they are destined to come from. Totally unpredictable. And whenever I ultimately DO produce said rewards, selectively, my dogs believe I'm magical and they're more than eager to either learn or perform. Which again is what I want.


I'm not sure of your level of experience with operant conditioning / learning theory, so here's a very brief overview that explains the basics. It touches a bit on anticipation and it's role. http://animals.howstuffworks.com/pets/dog-training1.htm 

Here is a link to wiki, it explains OC in slightly more detail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

petpeeve said:


> Far better that the dog understand you have little to offer but praise ???
> 
> See, the thing is. I WANT my dogs to think that a variety of rewards (of their choosing) are *somehow* / *potentially* available at all times. Whether those rewards eminate from my pocket, under my arm, from my mouth, or strictly from my sense of creativity for the moment ie: Premack, release to the environment, etc. Or even as I said before, having the rewards OFF of my body but hidden in a nearby location such as a cabinet drawer or the kitchen. In other words totally unpredictable.
> 
> ...



You're a classic example of a person who creates a dog working for themselves ...whereas I prefer to have a relationship where the dog is working for me. My dog knows she has done well because of our relationship/interaction/engagement versus a cheap reward. Good luck with your reward when a better one comes around. Your level of experience speaks for itself.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

K9 3X said:


> You're a classic example of a person who creates a dog working for themselves ...whereas I prefer to have a relationship where the dog is working for me. My dog knows she has done well because of our relationship/interaction/engagement versus a cheap reward. Good luck with your reward when a better one comes around. Your level of experience speaks for itself.


Ha, the reality verses your view of the situation is laughably askew. Plus the irony of your last line taunting their level of experience. Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

dagwall said:


> Ha, the reality verses your view of the situation is laughably askew. Plus the irony of your last line taunting their level of experience. Thanks for the laugh.


I know, right? Long term professional trainer and high level competitor, vs. Who, exactly? With what credentials? How many years of experience? Has put what kind of titles on what dogs? Don't get me wrong, petpeeve and I don't always see eye to eye, but ROFL. Research, people. Read the forum. It'll save embarrassment.

P.S: 'better reward comes around' is also funny and kind of a striking display of ignorance of how dogs work and learn. And dogs in general, drives present in most dogs, environmental stimulus, etc. Points to outdated, flawed, very limited methods. I'm not anywhere near the caliber of petpeeve and just based on that I'd be pretty confident that my dogs - any of them - perform better than this guy's (and no, not with food in my pockets). Just based on the horrible methodology and lack of understanding of dogs, learning theory, and behavior.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

dagwall said:


> Ha, the reality verses your view of the situation is laughably askew. Plus the irony of your last line taunting their level of experience. Thanks for the laugh.


I couldn't have said it better.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

K9 3X said:


> You're a classic example of a person who creates a dog working for themselves ...whereas I prefer to have a relationship where the dog is working for me. My dog knows she has done well because of our relationship/interaction/engagement versus a cheap reward. Good luck with your reward when a better one comes around. Your level of experience speaks for itself.


Actually, I think it is a classic example of a person who creates a dog that is working WITH them. IMO, that's the kind of relationship to have with your dog - a true partnership. Modern training techniques have evolved beyond the mindset of "I am the master - you work FOR ME!" petpeeve's methods of creating a magical relationship mean there is no fear of a 'better' reward coming around - there simply isn't one.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Maybe time to look into actual learning theory K9 3X... just walk away... seriously what you've said so far is just so wrong (like just completely it's not even a matter of opinion). You are lucky to have such a tolerant and intelligent dog in your hands


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

What have I said that is wrong? I simply suggest a dog which works for itself is a much less reliable dog than the dog which is working for the human/relationship/TEAM. Many of you can construe what I have said as some archaic mentality, that's to be expected because of your approach to training. A dog works best when the "reward" is not a cheapened token of meat, toy or other bribe. I also have to suggest that most every dog is at it's best when it comes to rely on the trust/ leadership and appropriate reciprocation of the human it has created the bond with. I think we can all appreciate that a relationship which is predicated and reliant upon a "treat" based reward system is flawed. Try proofing that dog when there is a more desirable "treat" ( not talking food here ), the dog will fail. I wonder if any of you actually believe that a dog can thrive on knowing that it has done properly and pleases the human? If you answer "yes" then you appreciate what I have been trying to state. Believe it or not, a dog wants to please and when they do, my dogs get the full force of my gratitude and "gratitude" isn't some food treat or other petty reward, sure they get food rewards but these rewards are secondary and rarely after the dog executes as it has been taught.

I am incredibly lucky to have the dogs I have and had. All of them came from solid lines with all the trimmings. I would have failed any of these dogs if they were not able to perform as they have. At the end of the day, I am the reward not a token piece of food or stuffed toy.

I am curious about something else, since someone suggest I should investigate operant conditioning. Question for you: since operant conditioning includes both +P and -P as well as +R and -R are you suggesting that your methods are all positive? If you think so, I'm betting you will withhold a reward when the dog fails to perform as instructed. I wonder how the dog feels not getting it's bribe? I'm guessing you have never thought about that. Anyone who uses all quadrants of operant conditioning utilizes punishment whether they choose to admit it or not and whatever form you choose to rationalize your "punishment" sectors with, is still punishment in the dog's eyes. 

If anyone of you can honestly say to me that you would rather NOT be the reward your dogs seeks, feel free. The only reason I can imagine someone willing to admit to this is because they chose to take a short cut to a dog which does okay most of the time for a token reward. Once you become the reward your dog desires, you'll have a dog that truly flourishes.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

We fully understand operant conditioning and agree we all use all four quadrants. The difference is most of us avoid using strong adversives as much as we can. Reinforcement simply means it causes an increase in the behavior and punishment causes a reduction in the behavior. Positive when you add something and negative when you take something away. The dog decides what is reinforcing and what is punishment, most things are pretty universal but not everything. 

Using food/toys to teach commands and periodically reward simply builds a bond between handler and dog. If they think they might just get a reward anytime but not everytime they do what you ask they listen. Same principle behind gambling, "I might win and get a reward this time...not this time, okay maybe next time". Works for people works for animals. 

Some dogs are simply people pleasers and will work to make you happy...not all dogs are that eager to please. My own dog is fairly biddable and is happy to do most things simply because I ask but he also has a long history of periodic reinforcement for doing so. Plenty of independent breeds are not people pleasers and good luck trying to get them to work for you with just a "good job".


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Acting like there's a firm distinction between the dog doing things to please people, and the dog doing things for a reward, seems to me like a false dichotomy. Yes, there are some dogs that inherently will walk across hot coals to please a human. But for the average dog, you can build up the dog's desire to please people by creating an association between performing for humans, and things the dog really likes. 

My big dog was not on board with the idea of training sessions when I first got him. Now he gets revved up when he thinks we're about to train, and responds much more enthusiastically to commands. I used food and fun to make the training sessions a good experience for him, and now he is pro-training regardless of whether toys or food are involved. Training has in itself become a reward. He came to associate training with fun, and now the training itself is fun to him.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> P.S: 'better reward comes around' is also funny and kind of a striking display of ignorance of how dogs work and learn. .



Your words above and some more of your words previous " It is possible for the dog to burn out on treats - or just not be that interested in food, or to burn out on the *exercise*, to a degree that it doesn't matter if you're waving steak under their nose, if they're bored and done and it's not fun, they are DONE." You just agreed with my original premise. Imagine that ! There are actually "better rewards", which you mocked me about earlier. I'll wager many a dog on an extended down/stay trained strictly with food will fail every time it's prey drive is indulged. Dogs with stronger prey drive than their food drive is a perfect example of a "better reward". The dog turns it's nose at the food treat and indulges itself in it's stronger drive ( otherwise known as a "reward" for the dog because it made the choice) and your wonderfully trained food motivated extended down/stay just registered a big fail.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

> Using food/toys to teach commands and periodically reward simply builds a bond between handler and dog.


Bob Bailey once said about training, "Pavlov is always sitting on your shoulder." So, yeah, the dog who sees his owner as the source of all good things _is_ working for that person.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

dagwall

You get it mostly. Oh, my doggies never just get a "good job", they get hardy engagement and a chance to be a rambunctious dog.

As far as aversives go, I have yet to mention anything which might suggest I use harsh corrections. However, withholding a treat, isolating a dog ( time out as it is called...sugarcoating) and other forms of "benign" corrections are punishment and many all positive trainers think they use no punishment, they couldn't be more wrong.


----------



## BKaymuttleycrew (Feb 2, 2015)

K9 3X said:


> What have I said that is wrong? I simply suggest a dog which works for itself is a much less reliable dog than the dog which is working for the human/relationship/TEAM. Many of you can construe what I have said as some archaic mentality, that's to be expected because of your approach to training. A dog works best when the "reward" is not a cheapened token of meat, toy or other bribe. I also have to suggest that most every dog is at it's best when it comes to rely on the trust/ leadership and appropriate reciprocation of the human it has created the bond with. I think we can all appreciate that a relationship which is predicated and reliant upon a "treat" based reward system is flawed. Try proofing that dog when there is a more desirable "treat" ( not talking food here ), the dog will fail. I wonder if any of you actually believe that a dog can thrive on knowing that it has done properly and pleases the human? If you answer "yes" then you appreciate what I have been trying to state. Believe it or not, a dog wants to please and when they do, my dogs get the full force of my gratitude and "gratitude" isn't some food treat or other petty reward, sure they get food rewards but these rewards are secondary and rarely after the dog executes as it has been taught.
> 
> I am incredibly lucky to have the dogs I have and had. All of them came from solid lines with all the trimmings. I would have failed any of these dogs if they were not able to perform as they have. At the end of the day, I am the reward not a token piece of food or stuffed toy.
> 
> ...


I'll just ask you one simple question - Do you expect a paycheck at the end of the week from your employer? or do you do his/her bidding all week long simply because you 'like to please'? 

And, although I'm fairly certain it isn't going to change your opinion on any of these training concepts, I'll provide a link to a nice little article. Read with an open mind. 
http://www.greatshakesdogtraining.com/busting-the-dogs-just-want-to-please-myth/


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

K9 3X said:


> dagwall
> 
> You get it mostly. Oh, my doggies never just get a "good job", they get hardy engagement and a chance to be a rambunctious dog.
> 
> As far as aversives go, I have yet to mention anything which might suggest I use harsh corrections. However, withholding a treat, isolating a dog ( time out as it is called...sugarcoating) and other forms of "benign" corrections are punishment and many all positive trainers think they use no punishment, they couldn't be more wrong.


No one said this but I agree 100% that they are forms of punishment.

There is no such thing as "purely positive." There is, however, reward based training which does not utilize P+ or R-.

And you've been told over and over that your original claims (i.e. learning theory on how to designate cues using multiple steps as being unnecessarily complicated/wrong) are wrong, as explicated by basic learning theory, operant conditioning and from the experience of people (including professional trainers).


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

K9 3X said:


> dagwall
> 
> You get it mostly. Oh, my doggies never just get a "good job", they get hardy engagement and a chance to be a rambunctious dog.
> 
> As far as aversives go, I have yet to mention anything which might suggest I use harsh corrections. However, withholding a treat, isolating a dog ( time out as it is called...sugarcoating) and other forms of "benign" corrections are punishment and many all positive trainers think they use no punishment, they couldn't be more wrong.


Very few people on this forum claim to never use punishment. I certainly never have. I use a fair amount of punishment in my training, how much and what kind depends on the dog and what I want them to stop doing. The majority of my training is done with positive reinforcement but there is a time and place for punishments. I only use mild adversives and removal of items/privileges. 

As for the "good job" and engagement means nothing to a lot of dogs without a long history of tangible rewards. Only very handler oriented dogs will work just for you. Dogs are opertunistic and do what works, they always look for what's in it for them.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

parus said:


> Acting like there's a firm distinction between the dog doing things to please people, and the dog doing things for a reward, seems to me like a false dichotomy. Yes, there are some dogs that inherently will walk across hot coals to please a human. But for the average dog, you can build up the dog's desire to please people by creating an association between performing for humans, and things the dog really likes.
> 
> .



Yes, like pleasing the human.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Can't speak for others but I concentrate virtually all of my training using R+ with some occasional P- / withholding of rewards. I'm hard pressed to come up with examples of when P+ or R- actually come into play, at least for me.

I also find that most people who use praise (ie: "pleasing the human") as their go-to secondary reinforcer have overvalued themselves in the dog's mind. And those same people typically use a considerable amount of R- / P+ on the other side of the coin, to elicit behaviours or to make corrections. They're deluded into believing the dog is working TO PLEASE THEM when in fact the dog is working merely to escape punishment and or the wrath of an unhappy handler. 

Anyways, this is getting somewhat off topic now.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

> As for the "good job" and engagement means nothing to a lot of dogs without a long history of tangible rewards. Only very handler oriented dogs will work just for you. Dogs are opertunistic and do what works, they always look for what's in it for them.


I don't think even the most handler oriented dogs are really working just for their owner. I mean I can train Thud without treats, toys, or aversives (even no reward markers in most things) because his highest value reward is a wrestling match with me. That is his gold standard, and it comes out rarely. So, you know, that's the most exciting thing ever and he'll do anything for a chance to do it - more so if he gets to bite me in the process. (ETA: I absolutely do use various kinds of punishments with my dogs in specific circumstances, from no reward markers to removal of access to something they want to prong collars and outright frying them with e-collars).

So, there's still a history of reward, it's just not a tangible reward and I think some people like to delude themselves about why their dogs do what they do and are busy anthropomorphizing the dog's reasoning into nonsense about devotion and loyalty, when it's more like a gambling problem . They're animals, not people. They're fundamentally self-centered, no matter how much nonsense is out there about the bond between dogs and humans. The reason they do things is because it benefits them to do those things. be that with a game, a piece of food, a toy, or not being physically hurt. 

(Meanwhile if I tried 'hearty engagement' with Jack or Kylie I'd shut them down and horrify them. They do NOT cope with loud, excited, and rough. Ever. Okay, no, sometimes. Kylie can get a little ramped up around toys or the agility course, but she's got a lot of history of reinforcement with food for those things and has built a positive association to them that excites her)


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

taquitos said:


> And you've been told over and over that your original claims (i.e. learning theory on how to designate cues using multiple steps as being unnecessarily complicated/wrong) are wrong, as explicated by basic learning theory, operant conditioning and from the experience of people (including professional trainers).


Look it, use all the multiple step cues you choose, confuse the dog, I don't care, I use what works. Furthermore, when people found out the dogs I have strictly worked with are GSDs, they started backpedaling with " oh, well those are intelligent dogs and may not require that.....etc". The dog in question IS a GSD for crying out loud, so why use techniques that work for other dogs which I guess are less intelligent when the dog the OP owns is a GSD ? I also stated that the down position is a submissive position and you or someone else says "we don't deal with dominance training theories...blah blah blah". I don't even know what motivates some to reply with such confusion as I simply stated a fact which might be part of the hurdle which the OP is facing with the difficulty of training a simple down. I trained a simple down to all the GSDs I have dealt with in a simple fashion of guiding the dog down to the position from a sitting position with it's nose using my closed hand and from it's nose I move my hand downward over it's chest, down a leg and in front of the paws but not too far out front, the moment the dog is down it gets my "YES" marker. I do not use a verbal or hand signal until the dog has succeeded a few times. People issuing a "down" command or hand signal generally end up repeating the command numerous times during the process and end up conditioning the dog to think repeating the same command is required or need not be heeded the first time. The old " setting a dog up for success" axiom is employed by not using any command until you know the dog will obey, then one should introduce the verbal and body gesture of one's choice. Why make it so complicated with all these multi cues and steps? You pretend teaching a dog a down is some complicated task. Just seems so odd to make it anything more than what it is.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

petpeeve said:


> Anyways, this is getting somewhat off topic now.



Yes, it is as are your assumptions.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> I don't think even the most handler oriented dogs are really working just for their owner. I mean I can train Thud without treats, toys, or aversives (even no reward markers) because his highest value reward is a wrestling match with me. That is his gold standard, and it comes out rarely. So, you know, that's the most exciting thing ever and he'll do anything for a chance to do it - more so if he gets to bite me in the process.
> 
> So, there's still a history of reward, it's just not a tangible reward and I think some people like to delude themselves about why their dogs do what they do and are busy anthropomorphizing the dog's reasoning into nonsense about devotion and loyalty, when it's more like a gambling problem . They're animals, not people. They're fundamentally self-centered, no matter how much nonsense is out there about the bond between dogs and humans. The reason they do things is because it benefits them to do those things. be that with a game, a piece of food, a toy, or not being physically hurt.
> 
> (Meanwhile if I tried 'hearty engagement' with Jack or Kylie I'd shut them down and horrify them. They do NOT cope with loud, excited, and rough. Ever. Okay, no, sometimes. Kylie can get a little ramped up around toys or the agility course, but she's got a lot of history of reinforcement with food for those things and has built a positive association to them that excites her)


I love the way you cheapen the relationship you have with your dogs. But, we all can do as we please.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

BKaymuttleycrew said:


> I'll just ask you one simple question - Do you expect a paycheck at the end of the week from your employer? or do you do his/her bidding all week long simply because you 'like to please'?
> 
> And, although I'm fairly certain it isn't going to change your opinion on any of these training concepts, I'll provide a link to a nice little article. Read with an open mind.
> http://www.greatshakesdogtraining.com/busting-the-dogs-just-want-to-please-myth/



The paycheck analogy is one I have heard many times before and it makes me think, just like Cpt Jack using the gambling analogy, heard that one too and makes me think. As far as a response to the "paycheck": I actually know people who's avocation is their vocation and would "work" for free, so I bring that into the mix since you are bringing the anthropomorphism into the equation. I do the same with Cappy Jack's gambling analogy. 

Most importantly, your comment about being certain it " it isn't going to change your opinion ", well don't be so certain. Because of this thread, I have learned a bit about a certain cast of characters, enough to know who fancies themselves as "real" trainers and others who certainly believe they have competent ability based on their strong opinions. It's good to test one's opinions and methodologies, it allows one to learn and improve as long as the mind is willing. I have all kinds of training questions and desire to improve on my current abilities and understandings. I fully expect my questions to be answered by many of the ones who objected to my responses with such "passion".


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

Well a lot of us have titled dogs in a handful of venues so our training methods can't be as ineffective as you seem to think. No one claimed your methods won't work, they will just limit the flexibility of your dog to think for themselves and come up with their own solutions to problems. We like our dogs to think for themselves and work out problems we put in front of them. From the information you've shared you train your dog(s) to do exactly what you say with no room for variation.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

dagwall said:


> From the information you've shared you train your dog(s) to do exactly what you say with no room for variation.


DING DING DING. 

I need my dogs to think for themselves, to some degree. I'm not doing competition obedience (and even there, from what I understand 'owner gone, dog behave' is a thing, as is enthusiasm). I'm doing agility. They need to listen to me, yes, and follow directions, but if I say 'jump' while pointing them at a tunnel because I had a brain fart, I NEED THEM TO TAKE THE TUNNEL, not jump over it. I need them to independently perform contacts, find the entrance to the weaves, take the jumps in their path, and generally act in concert with me - 

That's a whole lot different than being blindly obedient TO me. 

I mean sure, I say stay and I want them to stay, but I still need them to have independent thinking and decision making skills based on what I've taught them. I teach them how to play the game and reinforce the behaviors I want, but ultimately out there? They're the one running the whole course, and they need to make the call and figure it out, sometimes in spite of me. I can't shut that down and still get the performance I want and need in order to be successful. I can not escort them every step of the way around an agility course - nor can I verbally command every step they take. They can't be afraid to do act in the absence of specific commands, or to not make decisions.

Furthermore, they need to be up, happy, and enthusiastic. Otherwise, they go flat and dull and SLOW, which is absolutely not the idea.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

dagwall said:


> Well a lot of us have titled dogs in a handful of venues so our training methods can't be as ineffective as you seem to think. No one claimed your methods won't work, they will just limit the flexibility of your dog to think for themselves and come up with their own solutions to problems. We like our dogs to think for themselves and work out problems we put in front of them. From the information you've shared you train your dog(s) to do exactly what you say with no room for variation.


Since you have a titled dog( conformation strictly, not included ), I'll assume it's title requires obedience. In earning that title your dog did as exactly ( to the best of it's ability ) as you trained it. I fail to see the difference. Oh, I love improvisation by a dog to complete a task, they might be the best ones.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> DING DING DING.
> 
> I need my dogs to think for themselves, to some degree. I'm not doing competition obedience (and even there, from what I understand 'owner gone, dog behave' is a thing, as is enthusiasm). I'm doing agility. They need to listen to me, yes, and follow directions, but if I say 'jump' while pointing them at a tunnel because I had a brain fart, I NEED THEM TO TAKE THE TUNNEL, not jump over it. I need them to independently perform contacts, find the entrance to the weaves, take the jumps in their path, and generally act in concert with me -
> 
> ...


I'm a big fan of agility dogs because of the final product. They operate at a level where they do have to make split second decisions at times especially if a handler guides them in error momentarily. However, top level agility dogs do not get there by being blindly disobedient or even mildly disobedient, well heck let's just say disobedient.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Okay so I've read all this... and I'm struggling really hard to find your point. None of the arguments make sense.

Submissiveness (as in, I am submitting to you, the more dominant one) between dogs and humans isn't a thing. It just isn't, it has been disproven for several decades now. If you want links on showing that posters have several kicking around they can share. So, no, the OP's dog not doing a down doesn't have to do with dominance or submission. 

Yes. I have used treats to train my dog to do complex behaviours (copy my actions when asked), basic behaviours (sit, stay, etc), and behaviour modification (not chasing my cats, accept nail trims, etc). I have rewarded every time, then faded the reward to occasional, and gad zooks, my dog will STILL do what I ask when I don't have treats and don't reward her. Yes, some of those behaviours are on only a verbal cue. My dog is always happy to work with me, and IMO we have a stronger bond than many people I've seen who use minimal or no treat rewards in their training. 

So.. I don't really get what you're arguing here. Could I not have done that?

I mean, you can argue preference of methods I guess, sure, but you can't argue things that just aren't true?


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

ireth0 said:


> Submissiveness (as in, I am submitting to you, the more dominant one) between dogs and humans isn't a thing. It just isn't, it has been disproven for several decades now. If you want links on showing that posters have several kicking around they can share. So, no, the OP's dog not doing a down doesn't have to do with dominance or submission.


No, you took it completely out of context. I simply suggested that some dog posturing and gestures are innate forms of communication. Training a dog to down is not a submissive or dominant function even though the down position in the world of dog speak can be a sign of submission in the presence of other dogs. I assume everyone knows this. Dogs by nature tend to make themselves look larger or smaller dependent on the situation amongst their peers at times. I simply mentioned this as part of the overall picture. A human can mimic dog postures/gestures and the dog will pick up on these signals from a human and at times react accordingly. Play bows and staring or lack of are 2 wonderful examples. 

To clarify the "treats" issue, I have always used rewards when introducing new skills to a dog however once the behavior is learned, I do my best to reward the dog with higher value forms of "treats" such as engagement. Tug games and frisbee comes to mind and it's a nice transition as the form of reward involves the two of us interacting versus me being a food dispenser.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Okay? Not all dogs find those things more rewarding than a food reward though.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

I cannot argue that fact as all dogs are not wired the same way on their drive motivations. However, maybe you will agree that the go to reward is most always food based and continues on for the life of the dog even though the food treat is faded over time. All too many basic obedience and even higher level classes have instructors asking the attendees to not feed their dogs prior to the session. This by itself is an obvious attempt to capitalize on the dog's food drive. It might behoove many a human and instructor to investigate if the dog has another drive which might be utilized in the dog's training but rarely is. There are times when a dog's prey drive eclipses it's food drive and would be better employed as the "reward". Most everyone looks like a real "pro" training over the food bowl and the conditioning of the dog is underway. " I work for treats".


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Wow I've created a monster! Thank you all (K9 3X especially) for having such an insightful conversation in my absence.  I find always deeper conversations happen when methodologies and understandings are challenged, especially in a respectful manner as seen in this thread. 

So yes, I have a GSD. I don't think she has an issue with the down position in and of itself, as she will do it without question via the hand gesture. She will do it on walks, she'll do it around other dogs, no problem. The problem is just me explaining it wrong, most likely. 

As much as I've been trying to use my energy and enthusiasm and excitement - not even as a reward, but just to teach her to play - it's moving, but very slow going. She doesn't play with toys, although I am working on that, and while she will chase me throughout the house, she's not particularly excited or playful when she does it, just wants to be near me. Right now she will only work for food, so that is what I'm forced to use.

Yes I do know operant conditioning theory (and also use all 4 quadrants as do most people, and also prefer to stay with +R when teaching new behaviours). I clicker train using a marker click with my tongue. I do have clicker training experience (with many different horses), so I don't think my timing is that horrible either. 

I've put away the down command for the moment. In class this week we were doing place/release/come/heel, so I've been working a little bit more on that instead of boring her with down. She does show signs of having been taught in a +P form, or at least corrected too much, as she is slow to experiment, and will occasionally cower if you raise your voice too much when correcting (boyfriend does that when she's particularly... enthusiastic... about chasing the cat; we're working on his reactivity too lol). So even things like walking in heel position with a lure are a challenge, as she'll just stop, or walk in slow motion. 

Actually after typing this I realize that it may not even be anything that I'm doing wrong, just when left on her own to think and experiment, she is cautious to really do it. 

I did try a shaping exercise on friday, pure shaping (as in me sitting in a chair, not giving any commands or any gestures except click-reward at the slightest muscle movement in the right direction). I did two - first trying to get her to move her head upwards, and then trying to get her to move to a specific side. In both cases, she sat in front of me, motionless, happy to receive whatever reward came her way (I'd reward for muscle twitches), but eventually just laid down at my feet without moving. I was never able to shape her head to raise even an inch, nor get her to move even slightly to the side. She just sat in front of me (came to sit on her own accord, I didn't ask), then got bored and laid down. This was over a timeline of about... 10-15 minutes in both cases. I could definitely chalk it up to bad timing, although I have shaped all sorts of things with horses before, so again I can't be that bad. She was definitely not giving me much to work with though.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

K9 3X said:


> I cannot argue that fact as all dogs are not wired the same way on their drive motivations. However, maybe you will agree that the go to reward is most always food based and continues on for the life of the dog even though the food treat is faded over time. All too many basic obedience and even higher level classes have instructors asking the attendees to not feed their dogs prior to the session. This by itself is an obvious attempt to capitalize on the dog's food drive. It might behoove many a human and instructor to investigate if the dog has another drive which might be utilized in the dog's training but rarely is. There are times when a dog's prey drive eclipses it's food drive and would be better employed as the "reward". Most everyone looks like a real "pro" training over the food bowl and the conditioning of the dog is underway. " I work for treats".


That all depends on the venue you are training for and the instructors working there. I know a lot of places that encourage using toy rewards if that is what works for your dog, any potentially building that drive in your dog so you don't always need to bring food to class. Lots of places do suggest bringing a hungry dog to class, it depends on the dog on how good of an idea that really is. Some dogs need to be a bit hungry to get excited and work for food, potentially those dogs could be better served by finding another reward that motivates them better (if there is something else). Other dogs don't work as well if they are hungry, they become TOO focused on the food. 

My guy is super food motivated and when he last ate has zero to do with how willing he is to work with or without food. Food is his highest motivator, he will work with me for praise and engagement to a certain extent but without occasional food rewards his enthusiasm is going to wane. I don't have to pay him for every action but I do have to eventually pay out in a reward he highly values if I want him to remain excited and engaged in whatever we are working on. So yeah, he does work for treats but he doesn't just blow me off if I don't have a treat in my hand ready to pay him with either.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

Starting shaping with a dog who has never done it before can be very slow going at first. They don't know what you want and will just wait for you to tell them what to do. The idea of doing something of their own accord is just way too foreign to them and will take time and a number of repetitions before they get the idea. That is partly why people suggest starting shaping exercise with an item, usually a box, just so the dog has something in front of them to possibly engage with. Don't go into it with the idea of I want them to do xyz with the box. Just with the idea of wanting them to interact with the box. Reward for looking at the box, moving towards the box, touching the box, etc. Then you can try and refine it to nosing the box/pawing the box/stepping in the box whatever you want. But until they have some idea of what shaping is (getting rewarded for trying something they come up with) just waiting for a specific behavior from the dog is a bit of a tall order no matter how small your starting criteria is.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Alla said:


> Actually after typing this I realize that it may not even be anything that I'm doing wrong, just when left on her own to think and experiment, she is cautious to really do it.


This is the impression I've gotten from your previous posts about her. I think she was possibly trained using +P and only taught what not to do, so she's learning that sitting there quietly is always good and doing random things is probably bad. Or she just hasn't been trained much at all and is confused by the whole thing. I just if you just keep making things easy and go slow with her, her enthusiasm will increase. Prioritize enthusiasm over getting things right and she'll figure it out.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

I'm glad to hear you have seen "lots of places" which encourage other rewards besides food. My experience has been different obviously. I never really agreed with the idea of making a dog go hungry intentionally, seems a bit harsh but for many it is a palatable practice in their mind but for my dogs, I would never mess with the most basic essential requirements which a dog must have. Your comment " Other dogs don't work as well if they are hungry, they become TOO focused on the food." is a good example of my opinion. 

And yes, I know it's not starving the dog but in some instances I have seen some handlers hold back on a dog's food for an extended period of time to get the dog "primed" for a particular event. Hopefully, those who do this, understand the harshness of the punishment they are using.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> And yes, I know it's not starving the dog but in some instances I have seen some handlers hold back on a dog's food for an extended period of time to get the dog "primed" for a particular event. Hopefully, those who do this, understand the harshness of the punishment they are using.


I think it greatly depends on the dog and on the length of time. I see nothing wrong with skipping my dog's 9am meal in order to feed it to her during our 10am class. 



> I just if you just keep making things easy and go slow with her, her enthusiasm will increase. Prioritize enthusiasm over getting things right and she'll figure it out.


I think this is exactly what I'm going to focus on for now.  Focus on teaching her to play, be as engaging as I possibly can be (boy that's a hard one for me), and do one or two reps of something in the middle of playing or a walk or chasing.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I don't feed my dogs before training because, frankly, waiting an hour and a half to get their food won't kill them and while they would work just as enthusiastically, if they got dinner twice they'd be really, really, fat. Well, classes where there's lots of work going on - new material, counter conditioning, etc. When the rate of reinforcement drops or value is built in whatever it is they are doing/we're using more toys, that drops.

But me giving Molly two times the amount of her regular meal over the course of a training class, when the dog is being asked to wait maybe 2 hours past her meal is proooobably not something she registers as a severe punishment. 

Events are a little different. WIth me, car sickness and the fact that I'll be there, and feeding her, all day also matters. It's not to get more enthuasim, it's not prevent puking on the trip and then to prevent my dog's being lard buckets. That's just me, though.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

I generally only alter my dog's feeding based on any physical activities which would not allow the dog to be somewhat idle for a period before but more significantly after a meal. And this happens rarely.

CptJack, you have absolutely no reservations feeding 2X during an agility class? Maybe it's not an agility class and more relaxed.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

K9 3X said:


> I cannot argue that fact as all dogs are not wired the same way on their drive motivations. However, maybe you will agree that the go to reward is most always food based and continues on for the life of the dog even though the food treat is faded over time. All too many basic obedience and even higher level classes have instructors asking the attendees to not feed their dogs prior to the session. This by itself is an obvious attempt to capitalize on the dog's food drive. It might behoove many a human and instructor to investigate if the dog has another drive which might be utilized in the dog's training but rarely is. There are times when a dog's prey drive eclipses it's food drive and would be better employed as the "reward". Most everyone looks like a real "pro" training over the food bowl and the conditioning of the dog is underway. " I work for treats".


*There are times when a dog's prey drive eclipses it's food drive and would be better employed as the "reward".*

That could very well be. A wise trainer knows of and takes advantage of all drives present in the dog. But in a group class scenario typically containing 8 to 10 other attendees, possibly including everything from a timid 10 lb minpin, a bouncy 25 lb sheltie, all the way up to a boisterous reactive 100 lb lab mix, someone pulling out a flirt toy or braided snake and allowing their dog to indulge his preference / engage his prey drive may be catastrophic at worst and impractical at best. It is sometimes done, but with great care and in limited situations. That's why food treats are usually utilized as the popular reinforcer of choice. Safety. Practicality. Universal widespread appeal. Effectiveness. Lends well to even the most novice handler. And, time constraints (ability to potentially reinforce HUNDREDS of examples of behavior within an hour's time, if the handler wishes to do so). 

Plus it's generally a learning environment, didn't you say you use food treats yourself during the learning phase?


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

petpeeve said:


> *There are times when a dog's prey drive eclipses it's food drive and would be better employed as the "reward".*
> 
> That could very well be. A wise trainer knows of and takes advantage of all drives present in the dog. But in a group class scenario typically containing 8 to 10 other attendees, possibly including everything from a timid 10 lb minpin, a bouncy 25 lb sheltie, all the way up to a boisterous reactive 100 lb lab mix, someone pulling out a flirt toy or braided snake and allowing their dog to indulge his preference / engage his prey drive may be catastrophic at worst and impractical at best. It is sometimes done, but with great care and in limited situations. That's why food treats are usually utilized as the popular reinforcer of choice. Safety. Practicality. Universal widespread appeal. Effectiveness. Lends well to even the most novice handler. And, time constraints (ability to potentially reinforce HUNDREDS of examples of behavior within an hour's time, if the handler wishes to do so).
> 
> Plus it's generally a learning environment, didn't you say you use food treats yourself during the learning phase?


I can attest to this. In classes my dog gets much more distracted if other dogs are playing with a toy with their handlers (unless she is also similarly engaged in play)


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Also levels of arousal with a toy can sometimes be MORE than you want. I can and do use a toy reward with Molly for some things in class, but when I'm looking for calm, focused, behavior the lower value treat is the better choice. The same reason sometimes I train with kibble and sometimes I train with steak applies.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

petpeeve said:


> *
> Plus it's generally a learning environment, didn't you say you use food treats yourself during the learning phase?*


*

Yes, I do but basic obedience is well behind us at that point. I appreciate your thoughts regarding the use of indulging a dog's prey drive in a basic obedience class unless of course the class was breed specific or perhaps drive specific or task specific. For the average attendee at most typical companion pet obedience classes, the need to reward at the optimum level while building drive is not a concern necessarily. So, I plead "selfishness" since I was thinking more along the lines of performance/working dogs.*


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> Also levels of arousal with a toy can sometimes be MORE than you want. I can and do use a toy reward with Molly for some things in class, but when I'm looking for calm, focused, behavior the lower value treat is the better choice. The same reason sometimes I train with kibble and sometimes I train with steak applies.




When I am developing focus I go with whatever works and generally the more appealing the reward the more focus can be created. Teaching a dog to remain in a calm focused state with distractions galore is the name of the game at my end of the leash.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

K9 3X, any idea for how to develop that focus? 

I have huge focus issues, especially with other dogs around. But even without them. I can't find anything to offer that will sustain her focus if there's as much as the tiniest of distractions.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

K9 3X said:


> When I am developing focus I go with whatever works and generally the more appealing the reward the more focus can be created. Teaching a dog to remain in a calm focused state with distractions galore is the name of the game at my end of the leash.


Sure, and I do lots and lots of distraction and focus work. A lot of it's built into our agility classes, some of it's on my own. However, that doesn't mean the tug toy isn't high value, doesn't cause enthusiasm and excitement in performing what I am asking of her, and doesn't change her mental state. When I'm asking her to stop and work on something difficult, but that requires CALM focus, I'm better off with food. Can she remain focused and work with a tug waving in her face? Yes. Am I going to get calm, slow, deliberate, thoughtful action using tug as a reward? Prrrroooobably not. 

She's 10 months old. If she can when she's 2 is another matter, but right now I don't use the highest value reward I have for everything, ANYWAY.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Alla said:


> K9 3X, any idea for how to develop that focus?
> 
> I have huge focus issues, especially with other dogs around. But even without them. I can't find anything to offer that will sustain her focus if there's as much as the tiniest of distractions.


It's a great debate as to what "focus" actually should look like but the result is all the same in my opinion. I prefer to train a dog to develop focus using two different targets, one being an object which "mesmerizes" the dog and the other my eyes. It is the eyes which many might debate over. I prefer using the eyes as the visual target of my dog's focus. I use both focus drills intermittently but ultimately end up using the focus created on an object and transfer it to my eyes. From the beginning, I always used games and engagement/anticipation to strengthen the "eyes" command, this link has some basic ways to develop focus at a starting level which is more suitable for this forum http://www.kindredspiritsk9.com/attention.html. There's probably some methods there which will create a base for the dog learning to fixate on your eyes per the command. I choose to also use the 'mesmerizing" object such as displayed in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqBPiZK4BcU It was fairly easy to reproduce what this video shows but I shifted the dog's gaze to my eyes over time rather than the object itself. I'd move the object off to the side while holding it and command for "eyes", the dog gives me the stare and "yes", boom the dog is released and gets the object. Building the duration of the dog locked on to my eyes is increased and every time the dog looks away, we start anew. The training exercise is kind of cheating as you start off rewarding the dog for fixating/freezing on the object and then develops into the dog fixating/freezing on you. My dogs over the years seemed easy enough to get the idea what "eyes" mean. You can develop it to where you use the dog's name along with the command "eyes" and before long every time you say the dog's name they will give you their "eyes". Using the drill in the video will allow you to take the focus on the object and utilize it in off leash training, the dog will heel with it's head and eyes looking at your head and eyes even if you are not looking at the dog. The focus during heeling is just the tip of the iceberg. Watch some IPO obedience trials and you will see this in action.

Developing focus however comes on the heels of obedience and you cannot have focus without a solid foundation of obedience. If I were in your situation as you described it, I would work on an extended down stay with the dog leashed, giving you the ability to maintain more control when a minor distraction occurs. Maybe practicing in the house with absolutely no distractions, start small and work up the duration as you see fit. I will say, I have seen many a person start to get anxious the longer a down stay remains thinking the dog will break and it is torturing the dog, believe me it isn't, this mentality works against the process as the dog is a quick study of your emotional state, tension feeds tension and calm feeds calm. Once you have achieved a solid down stay over time, the focus training becomes so much easier. Start small, a few seconds of your dog's gaze per your command needs to be instantly marked and rewarded within a second or so. As I mentioned earlier, one must have a solid base of obedience developed in their dog to really achieve the focus you want. Essentially, obedience is focus even if they aren't stuck on your eyes.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

K9 3X said:


> It's a great debate as to what "focus" actually should look like but the result is all the same in my opinion. I prefer to train a dog to develop focus using two different targets, one being an object which "mesmerizes" the dog and the other my eyes. It is the eyes which many might debate over. I prefer using the eyes as the visual target of my dog's focus. I use both focus drills intermittently but ultimately end up using the focus created on an object and transfer it to my eyes. From the beginning, I always used games and engagement/anticipation to strengthen the "eyes" command, this link has some basic ways to develop focus at a starting level which is more suitable for this forum http://www.kindredspiritsk9.com/attention.html. There's probably some methods there which will create a base for the dog learning to fixate on your eyes per the command. I choose to also use the 'mesmerizing" object such as displayed in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqBPiZK4BcU It was fairly easy to reproduce what this video shows but I shifted the dog's gaze to my eyes over time rather than the object itself. I'd move the object off to the side while holding it and command for "eyes", the dog gives me the stare and "yes", boom the dog is released and gets the object. Building the duration of the dog locked on to my eyes is increased and every time the dog looks away, we start anew. The training exercise is kind of cheating as you start off rewarding the dog for fixating/freezing on the object and then develops into the dog fixating/freezing on you. My dogs over the years seemed easy enough to get the idea what "eyes" mean. You can develop it to where you use the dog's name along with the command "eyes" and before long every time you say the dog's name they will give you their "eyes". Using the drill in the video will allow you to take the focus on the object and utilize it in off leash training, the dog will heel with it's head and eyes looking at your head and eyes even if you are not looking at the dog. The focus during heeling is just the tip of the iceberg. Watch some IPO obedience trials and you will see this in action.
> 
> Developing focus however comes on the heels of obedience and you cannot have focus without a solid foundation of obedience. If I were in your situation as you described it, I would work on an extended down stay with the dog leashed, giving you the ability to maintain more control when a minor distraction occurs. Maybe practicing in the house with absolutely no distractions, start small and work up the duration as you see fit. I will say, I have seen many a person start to get anxious the longer a down stay remains thinking the dog will break and it is torturing the dog, believe me it isn't, this mentality works against the process as the dog is a quick study of your emotional state, tension feeds tension and calm feeds calm. Once you have achieved a solid down stay over time, the focus training becomes so much easier. Start small, a few seconds of your dog's gaze per your command needs to be instantly marked and rewarded within a second or so. As I mentioned earlier, one must have a solid base of obedience developed in their dog to really achieve the focus you want. Essentially, obedience is focus even if they aren't stuck on your eyes.


 I disagree with most of what you suggest here. But for simplicity I'll just start with this and see where it goes. 



> Developing focus however comes on the heels of obedience and you cannot have focus without a solid foundation of obedience.


I would say on the contrary, .. obedience comes on the heels of developing focus and you cannot have obedience without a solid foundation of focus.

Voluntary attention is the very first lesson I teach my dogs. Because imo, without attention *you got nuthin'* or the next thing to it. That's why I recommended the op teach it to their dog as a separate exercise, a few pages back.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

K9 3X said:


> I'm a big fan of agility dogs because of the final product. They operate at a level where they do have to make split second decisions at times especially if a handler guides them in error momentarily. However, top level agility dogs do not get there by being blindly disobedient or even mildly disobedient, well heck let's just say disobedient.


You will not find many agility dogs trained without treats. 

What kind of training do you do with your dogs? I think that makes a larger difference in what your view is on reinforcement. In agility we are trying to build drive and desire for the game. Some dogs have it very naturally but others (most) need reinforcement from food or toys to really get it. There's so many little steps and the speed of things complicates it quite a bit.

But the end goal is always to make the game itself fun and the reward since you can't use a reward in a trial. 

Using toys/treats is not replacing the bond between handler and dog. It's just a tool you use to motivate the dog and provide the dog with feedback.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Alla, I think you are expecting things to move too quickly. It hasn't been long that you've had your dog  My dog didn't touch toys until several months with me. He didn't "know" how to play with them.. or it seemed that way, until one day I took him to a park with my friend's dog (who is fetch crazy btw he just looks for sticks and barks at his owner the entire time because there's nothing more rewarding to him then fetch lol!), and it just "clicked." 

He still doesn't play a whole lot with sticks or balls, but he will play with other things like stuffies and whatnot 

I would say try various toys with different textures, shapes, etc. and best of all give her time 

And I have a spitz breed. He doesn't give two craps about pleasing me lol. He just does not give a crap if he has better ideas of what he's going to do. Using treats, in his case, definitely made me more important/interesting/motivating in his mind. He is generally very obedient (minus recall which is about 80% I would say). If I did not have treats as his "currency" I would literally have no other way of motivating him. I don't use treats all the time, just at the beginning and intermittently. I rarely give him treats for his basic commands now but he listens 95% of the time. No treats then forget it you would not be able to train my dog. He shuts down with anything mildly aversive and he does not work for toys or to please humans.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

petpeeve said:


> I disagree with most of what you suggest here. But for simplicity I'll just start with this and see where it goes.
> 
> 
> I would say on the contrary, .. obedience comes on the heels of developing focus and you cannot have obedience without a solid foundation of focus.
> ...


I agree with "voluntary attention" as the starting point. However, teaching something which is "voluntary" seems like an oxymoron. "Voluntary attention" is a freebie but still a behavior which can be marked and enhanced. I take the "voluntary attention" the pup gives and build/develop on that. One does not take a dog to a level of focused obedient attention as displayed in the video without the dog having a solid base of obedience. Using Tip # 2 in the link I provided is a good example of having a dog with a small amount of skill and then developing focus or additional focus.

What I think you are not taking into the equation of your disagreement is the dog in question. If Porsche's picture is accurate, the dog is not a puppy and your " Voluntary attention is the very first lesson I teach my dogs" well, that ship has already sailed. I am trying to be specific to the situation. Since you want to start from the "very first lesson I teach my dogs" I would only ask that you reconsider the situation at hand and then proceed from there. The dog in question already has learned behaviors which need to be modified and a different protocol needs to be applied since tendencies have already been developed which is making the evolution and creation of enhanced or even basic focus more difficult. Can the dog in question offer up "voluntary attention" ? I believe so and I would capitalize on it. Another thought, "voluntary attention" is fine, the more the better but after the "freebie" one trains their pup to develop and increase the attention through many methods of engagement. 

Focus and the development of it occurs at many levels, depends on how far one wants to take it. This video dealing with focused heeling shows a dog with basic obedience skills and the development of more enhanced focus. So, the notion that " obedience comes on the heels of developing focus and you cannot have obedience without a solid foundation of focus." might be challenged. Do I need a dog's attention to train more effectively, yes. Can I train a dog to have more focus as the obedience increases and is already there? Yes. The video is a good example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxii1H0waGY

One last thought, the reason I suggested to Alla to work on an extended down stay is because the basic premise of the exercise is the anticipation of being released and rewarded. Anticipation is a strong tool one can use and while a dog is exhibiting controlled obedience ( in a down stay ) with the anticipation building, the dog will generally offer more focus. Therefore the obedience helps create the focus as the dog patiently waits for what is coming next as it most likely is very favorable.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> What kind of training do you do with your dogs?


I essentially train for a dog which becomes a loyal and dedicated protector ( which is a myth according to some in here ) of the family with the ability and restraint as required. Gentle as a lamb and able to "perform" when required. Enough said.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

K9 3X said:


> I essentially train for a dog which becomes a loyal and dedicated protector ( which is a myth according to some in here ) of the family with the ability and restraint as required. Gentle as a lamb and able to "perform" when required. Enough said.


So... you train for a decent family dog. Not knocking that, but honestly that level of performance probably isn't high enough for you to NEED to know a thing about learning theory because what you're training just isn't complex. Most dogs will give you that via any method you choose to use. The level of distractions and complexities isn't that challenging and doesn't NEED the rate of reward and value of what a lot of us are talking about.

And Laurelin is right - you won't find dogs in agility not trained with treats and toys. More toys sometimes, but there are a few places treats are pretty necessary.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

K9 3X said:


> I essentially train for a dog which becomes a loyal and dedicated protector ( which is a myth according to some in here ) of the family with the ability and restraint as required. Gentle as a lamb and able to "perform" when required. Enough said.


I do think this is a large part of the communication issue here. Most the people you are talking to are training for trials and events of some kind. We have to compete against a lot of distractions and are asking some very complex behaviors from our dogs. Thus it takes a lot of baby steps and a high rewards to get the job done. 

The video with the GSD focusing on a ball is essentially the same thing most people do with their dogs and toys or treats. It's drive building for that object to motivate the dog. Once you have that then you can use it to train just about anything. They're also probably starting with very high drive dogs to begin with assuming they're working german shepherds.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> So... you train for a decent family dog. Not knocking that, but honestly that level of performance probably isn't high enough for you to NEED to know a thing about learning theory because what you're training just isn't complex. Most dogs will give you that via any method you choose to use. The level of distractions and complexities isn't that challenging and doesn't NEED the rate of reward and value of what a lot of us are talking about.
> 
> And Laurelin is right - you won't find dogs in agility not trained with treats and toys. More toys sometimes, but there are a few places treats are pretty necessary.


I expected someone to respond as such. Any of the dogs I have worked with over the decades would be fit competitors in IPO or Mondioring but that isn't the "product" I train for at the end of the day. And FWIW I know of some wonderful Mondioring Mals which were trained ab initio without any treats ( food ) however they were treated with engagement which eclipsed any food scrap, imagine that ! As far as "level of performance" you are making assumptions again. You know nothing of the dogs I have worked with and what their task is. Someday, I aspire to understand the "complexities" you are so accomplished in. Better yet, get back to me when you understand the "complexities" of PP dogs.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Working line mals and GSDs are typically bred for a lot of toy/prey drive, and handler focus. Claiming that training dogs with engagement and toys is better than food is really specific to the type of dogs you have worked with and do not apply to all dogs. It doesn't even apply to all GSDs.

Also, if you haven't actually trained a dog for IPO or mondio, then you don't really know that your dogs would be good competitors.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

haha, image that... a breed well know for high innate drive and handler oriented doing great without food rewards... mind blown.... or not. 

You don't seem to be understanding the difference in drives across breeds.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

dagwall said:


> haha, image that... a breed well know for high innate drive and handler oriented doing great without food rewards... mind blown.... or not.
> 
> You don't seem to be understanding the difference in drives across breeds.


Or in individuals. 

My dad's a GSD guy and cop. We've been out of contact for years, but his partner doing the K9 thing lived with us. She was a hard, driven, and not really all that stable dog (not being stable unrelated). The dog he got many years later? Soft, submissive, timid, and lacking both confidence and drive.

Also I can promise you that 'handler focus' isn't always the end all, be all, even for hard, high drive dogs (see also: My GSD mix). Food STILL has a role to play in building value both in ME, toys, and in the activity/behavior/chain I'm asking of him - same as any other dog. Just because he WILL do without them doesn't mean he won't do better with them. 

And Kylie has toy drive at all because of pairing it with food.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

dagwall said:


> haha, image that... a breed well know for high innate drive and handler oriented doing great without food rewards... mind blown.... or not.
> 
> You don't seem to be understanding the difference in drives across breeds.


I appreciate the differences, it's why I choose the breed I have.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

K9 3X said:


> I appreciate the differences, it's why I choose the breed I have.


But that doesn't really help the OP.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

elrohwen said:


> But that doesn't really help the OP.


Sure it does. OP has a shepherd. They're all exactly alike.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

elrohwen said:


> Also, if you haven't actually trained a dog for IPO or mondio, then you don't really know that your dogs would be good competitors.


Actually, I have as part of their overall training. IPO and Mondioring dogs execute certain skills because they are having "fun". That's where the difference is.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

K9 3X said:


> Actually, I have as part of their overall training. IPO and Mondioring dogs execute certain skills because they are having "fun". That's where the difference is.


That doesn't make sense or answer my question. Have you trained and competed in IPO or mondio? If you haven't that's totally fine, but don't claim that your dogs would be competitive if you haven't competed. 

And yes, IPO dogs do things because they are fun for the dog. All dogs should do agility or obedience or whatever because they find it fun. So? I don't think anyone has disagreed with that.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

elrohwen said:


> Working line mals and GSDs are typically bred for a lot of toy/prey drive, and handler focus. Claiming that training dogs with engagement and toys is better than food is really specific to the type of dogs you have worked with and do not apply to all dogs. It doesn't even apply to all GSDs.
> 
> *Also, if you haven't actually trained a dog for IPO or mondio, then you don't really know that your dogs would be good competitors.*


So much this! I see people say this all the time about agility- my dog can do that and beat all the other dogs! If you're not training in it, you don't know how they'd do. It belittles the work people put in the sports to say such things. And to be frank if you're not involved then you just have no clue how intricate the training is. I don't do PP work or sports with my dogs so can't comment there but it's easy to brag if you have no intention of backing it up by competing.



> I expected someone to respond as such. Any of the dogs I have worked with over the decades would be fit competitors in IPO or Mondioring but that isn't the "product" I train for at the end of the day. And FWIW I know of some wonderful Mondioring Mals which were trained ab initio without any treats ( food ) however they were treated with engagement which eclipsed any food scrap, imagine that ! As far as "level of performance" you are making assumptions again. You know nothing of the dogs I have worked with and what their task is. Someday, I aspire to understand the "complexities" you are so accomplished in. Better yet, get back to me when you understand the "complexities" of PP dogs.


We encourage dogs to engage in agility. We use food, toys, and play. Play is probably the most important but food is in there. Keep in mind many dogs doing agility- unlike dogs doing PP work- are just pets. Various breeds, various levels of drive and biddability. You just can't compare them to working bred malinois and GSDs. Food is something MOST dogs will work for. If you have a dog without prey/toy drive then what? You need another reward.

I seriously doubt everyone here is completely clinical and doing 'do this get a treat' without any relationship building or engagement. You're not going to get far without it. Using food does NOT mean you are not also using play and engagement.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

OP has a GSD which probably is mostly ASL lines in it or some derivative. Not very drivey dogs usually when compared to DDR, Czech and WG GSDs on an overview. I prefer the WGSL bred to SV standards. It's a more complete package when sharing it's life with a family. Still has drive, nerve and smarts and wonderfully compatible with it's human and lifestyle.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

elrohwen said:


> That doesn't make sense or answer my question. Have you trained and competed in IPO or mondio? If you haven't that's totally fine, but don't claim that your dogs would be competitive if you haven't competed.
> 
> And yes, IPO dogs do things because they are fun for the dog. All dogs should do agility or obedience or whatever because they find it fun. So? I don't think anyone has disagreed with that.


What part of training a PP dog escapes you ?


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

elrohwen said:


> That doesn't make sense or answer my question. Have you trained and competed in IPO or mondio? If you haven't that's totally fine, but don't claim that your dogs would be competitive if you haven't competed.
> 
> And yes, IPO dogs do things because they are fun for the dog. All dogs should do agility or obedience or whatever because they find it fun. So? I don't think anyone has disagreed with that.



Yes, I have spent many hours training at the local Schutzhund club, it's a wonderful foundation to build off of.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

K9 3X said:


> What part of training a PP dog escapes you ?


You're still avoiding the question.

I could train a dog to bite people and call it a PP dog. Doesn't mean it could compete in IPO though. Claiming that the intricacies of IPO training are beyond all of our understand when you haven't even trained or competed in it is laughable. If you have competed, just say so instead of dodging the question.

ETA: I am currently taking private lessons with an IPO trainer with my spaniel. Not to train him for IPO, but because the guy is good at building drive. And guess what, he is able to read my dog and modify his suggestions. He's not having me train my dog exactly the same the same way he is training his next IPO dog, because they are not the same. That's part of being a good trainer. Claiming all dogs should just be like GSDs or mals or whatever is a limited view of training. It's fine if those are the types of dogs you want, but it still doesn't help the OP with her problem if her dog won't even look at a toy right now.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Do you even have a BH on your current, or any former, dogs?


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

I'm only suggesting that too many dog trainers become reliant on being a treat ( food) dispenser. I guess my exposure to the breed I have become familiar with is different or perhaps it is the style of training, is that possible? I use food rewards as I have stated to train the initial behaviors and then replace the reward. I don't want to have a food based reward system with my dogs, I prefer something else. Is that okay ?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

K9 3X said:


> OP has a GSD which probably is mostly ASL lines in it or some derivative. Not very drivey dogs usually when compared to DDR, Czech and WG GSDs on an overview. I prefer the WGSL bred to SV standards. It's a more complete package when sharing it's life with a family. Still has drive, nerve and smarts and wonderfully compatible with it's human and lifestyle.


If you are admitting the OP has a dog that might not have the level of drive of the example working dogs you've posted wouldn't it then make sense to bring out other rewards and see what works for the OP's individual dog?

Dogs aren't robots. My trainer is a BC person and the stereotypical BC is a toy nut. But her youngest one isn't. She had to build toy drive with him via food and shaping. You can't look at a dog and say 'You are this breed therefore you WILL be exactly like every other member of your breed'


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

K9 3X said:


> I'm only suggesting that too many dog trainers become reliant on being a treat ( food) dispenser. I guess my exposure to the breed I have become familiar with is different or perhaps it is the style of training, is that possible? I use food rewards as I have stated to train the initial behaviors and then replace the reward. I don't want to have a food based reward system with my dogs, I prefer something else. Is that okay ?


If what you have works with you and your dogs then great. 

People who understand training aren't going to be a food dispenser and nothing else. I think that is why people are frustrated. Some of your posts make it sound like you believe using food will be a detriment to your relationship with your dog or that you can't use food and also be engaging. The food can act the same way the ball does to that shepherd in the video. It is a way TO engage/encourage playing with your dog.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

CptJack said:


> Do you even have a BH on your current, or any former, dogs?



My dogs have all passed the requirements in flying colors to achieve a BH at 1 1/2 years of age.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> If what you have works with you and your dogs then great.
> 
> People who understand training aren't going to be a food dispenser and nothing else. I think that is why people are frustrated. Some of your posts make it sound like you believe using food will be a detriment to your relationship with your dog or that you can't use food and also be engaging. The food can act the same way the ball does to that shepherd in the video. It is a way TO engage/encourage playing with your dog.


Would I alter my GSDs training to have it accomplish an agility course if I get results with my methods?


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Okay, I don't even own a dog. I do have a goldfish named Moby however.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

K9 3X said:


> Would I alter my GSDs training to have it accomplish an agility course if I get results with my methods?


I don't understand what you are asking. I would postulate that if you have no experience with agility it would be easy to set you and your dogs up to have some big issues if they were to compete. It's not hard to get a dog to complete a course. It's the 'other stuff' that is difficult. 

My main point I'm trying to make is training isn't one size fits all and it's not static. I don't train the same from dog to dog partially because my dogs have all been different individuals with different personalities and drives. I also train dogs differently because I learn and evolve over time. I don't like seeing people fall into a trap of 'this is my way and I will NEVER deviate even if I'd get better results if I did'.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> If you are admitting the OP has a dog that might not have the level of drive of the example working dogs you've posted wouldn't it then make sense to bring out other rewards and see what works for the OP's individual dog?
> 
> \'


A WGSL is not a "working" dog but it will work just as any dog will work. Plus, I never suggested not to use a particular reward, where did you conjure that up.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I don't understand what you are asking. I would postulate that if you have no experience with agility it would be easy to set you and your dogs up to have some big issues if they were to compete. It's not hard to get a dog to complete a course. It's the 'other stuff' that is difficult.
> 
> My main point I'm trying to make is training isn't one size fits all and it's not static. I don't train the same from dog to dog partially because my dogs have all been different individuals with different personalities and drives. I also train dogs differently because I learn and evolve over time. I don't like seeing people fall into a trap of 'this is my way and I will NEVER deviate even if I'd get better results if I did'.


I agree, dogs have personalities.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> http://www.kindredspiritsk9.com/attention.html.


This is so awesome, thank you!



> I'd move the object off to the side while holding it and command for "eyes", the dog gives me the stare and "yes".


The -only- object Porsche will stare at mesmerized is the cat in my arms. However, I'm not quite sure how to get the dog to look at me instead when moving the object (in this case cat) away from my face? She'll just follow the cat with her eyes. Is this exercise for later on, once you've taught the basic "look at me" command? Then reward the eye flicker to you by releasing the cat?



> Once you have achieved a solid down stay over time, the focus training becomes so much easier.


Okay, I see how this works, sort of. Porsche is rather low energy (but damn high stamina), so a long down stay wouldn't really be a problem for her (although I haven't done anything longer than 4-5 seconds so far in the house... baby steps lol). She does a 5-10 minute down-stay at training class though (well I guess its more of a 'settle' than a formal down-stay), but she quickly stops looking at me and starts paying attention to whatever else is going on in the environment, usually other dogs. Does this anticipation building then help due to you later introducing a distraction, i.e. bringing in the mesmerizing object? Or just the anticipation of the release will be focus enough? 

LOL @ goldfish comment. 

My dog is actually from german lines - to the extent of my knowledge. Actually, most dogs that come out of that breeder's kennel are very drivey, working-type dogs. Porsche is just special.  Which is how I like it. I was specifically looking for a low drive, low energy dog. Sooo now I'm trying to build up her drive slightly, or at least learn to redirect it away from alive things and onto me/inanimate things.

Re: toys/engagement/treats discussion - I am loving this discussion tbh.  Am I going to stop using food as a reward? No, I don't have any other options right now lol. Am I working on making other kinds of things more rewarding so I have more options, and so I can actually -play- with my dog? You betcha. I'd love to play with my dog. I'd also love to use it as a reward for training. 

Whatever works kind of scenario here lol.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I'm trying to think of a way to train all aspects of agility with just focus/handler engagement/or maybe sometimes a toy - with any dog. I really don't think it could be done. You could get the dog through a course, maybe, but I'd expect it to be sloppy/choppy/ugly in places and quite a bit of time lost as a result. A lot of the handling stuff and safe obstacle performance at the earlier stages really doesn't seem to be conducive to toy training, and I'm kind of iffy about independent contact performance. Maybe with running contacts? 

I mean obviously at the end of the day they're all performing with handler focus in a trial since no treats/toys are allowed, but even the craziest toy driven dogs handlers use at least some food. At least those I've been around. Too hard to get your timing perfect with a toy, and then there's rewarding in position which is danged hard with a toy, though yes you could mark it and then reward with a toy, building value IN THE POSITION THEY ARE IN is a useful thing for some stuff. 

Not that toys aren't also useful. Building Kylie's toy drive helped her a ton in agility, but it's easier to throw food than reward in position with a toy, and there are places you need both.

Don't know. Not that experienced, yet.

Definitely can't train the border collie and the chi-mix fluffy thing the same way, though. LOL.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I am completely lost as to what the point you are trying to make is.

All people are trying to say is since the OP's dog likes food right now and not toys, use the food to build drive for other things. If the dog doesn't have toy drive then using a ball on a string as the reward (er... mesmerizing object) isn't going to work. 

Saying 'but you have a GSD!' still doesn't mean that the OP's dog operates like yours do.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Laurelin said:


> I am completely lost as to what the point you are trying to make is.
> 
> All people are trying to say is since the OP's dog likes food right now and not toys, use the food to build drive for other things. If the dog doesn't have toy drive then using a ball on a string as the reward (er... mesmerizing object) isn't going to work.
> 
> Saying 'but you have a GSD!' still doesn't mean that the OP's dog operates like yours do.


I have a mutt. How am I supposed to know what training method to use?!

Kind of reminds me of a dog event we went to where Royal Canin had a table with breed specific foods. Talked to the purebreds before and after us, but avoided eye contact from me, lmao.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

I only have a few minutes to comment and I'm going comment on something that I haven't seen mentioned yet...but I just sped-read a lot of this. 

I like to build the love of the work/sport/what to the level in dogs that being able to so the work itself is rewarding to them. If you have seen Lars' videos in obedience and Ocean's videos in agility...they give me nothing less than 2000%. They work and they run hard because I have made the work so much fun and rewarding for them. They want nothing more than to play their "game" with me. They will work at that level without rewards shoved into their faces. I do use rewards though in my training...but I use them to drive home points where they were brilliant or nailed something that is or has been challenging to them. Every time at home or in training, if Ocean nails his stopped contacts...he is thrown his tug toy and we play a huge game of tug with him in position on those contact yellow areas. He nails a hard sequence and keeps the bars up...he is thrown a tug and we celebrate by vigorously tugging. He then tries harder and harder to be right. 

I used food jackpots for Lars while we were figuring out Utility Obedience with each other. I have spent a ton of time making obedience dynamic and exciting for him when he was much younger and it has paid off ten fold in the ring in the higher levels. He's a drivey dog and instead of trying to squash that drive, I encouraged it with obedience and heeling games. Like Ocean, if he nails something hard we've been working on like when learning go outs for directed jumping or me upping the ante with difficult proofing exercises, Lars gets jackpots of food rewards and I make a big deal about how brilliant he is. That sort of feedback builds confidence. When we show in Obedience, he comes out of the ring and gets a big food jackpot for a job well done. I need him to be able to complete a full utility run with drive and enthusiasm with no rewards on me...I have put a lot of effort into building the love of the work and the love of playing this awesome game called obedience with me. That's they way I look at dog training. I always tell people I have dogs who volunteer their time for my cause...they volunteer gladly and willingly because I have shown them how much fun and rewarding that cause is.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

MrsBoats said:


> I only have a few minutes to comment and I'm going comment on something that I haven't seen mentioned yet...but I just sped-read a lot of this.
> 
> I like to build the love of the work/sport/what to the level in dogs that being able to so the work itself is rewarding to them. If you have seen Lars' videos in obedience and Ocean's videos in agility...they give me nothing less than 2000%. They work and they run hard because I have made the work so much fun and rewarding for them. They want nothing more than to play their "game" with me. They will work at that level without rewards shoved into their faces. I do use rewards though in my training...but I use them to drive home points where they were brilliant or nailed something that is or has been challenging to them. Every time at home or in training, if Ocean nails his stopped contacts...he is thrown his tug toy and we play a huge game of tug with him in position on those contact yellow areas. He nails a hard sequence and keeps the bars up...he is thrown a tug and we celebrate by vigorously tugging. He then tries harder and harder to be right.
> 
> I used food jackpots for Lars while we were figuring out Utility Obedience with each other. I have spent a ton of time making obedience dynamic and exciting for him when he was much younger and it has paid off ten fold in the ring in the higher levels. He's a drivey dog and instead of trying to squash that drive, I encouraged it with obedience and heeling games. Like Ocean, if he nails something hard we've been working on like when learning go outs for directed jumping or me upping the ante with difficult proofing exercises, Lars gets jackpots of food rewards and I make a big deal about how brilliant he is. That sort of feedback builds confidence. When we show in Obedience, he comes out of the ring and gets a big food jackpot for a job well done. I need him to be able to complete a full utility run with drive and enthusiasm with no rewards on me...I have put a lot of effort into building the love of the work and the love of playing this awesome game called obedience with me. That's they way I look at dog training. I always tell people I have dogs who volunteer their time for my cause...they volunteer gladly and willingly because I have shown them how much fun and rewarding that cause is.


Only one question... How? lol. Just jackpots and energy? Or is this only applicable at higher levels, i.e. past the point where a dog can figure out that the word "down" means the same as the gesture for down? lol


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

Alla said:


> Only one question... How? lol. Just jackpots and energy?


Pretty much.  But keep in mind, they aren't my first dogs. Lars is my second and Ocean is my third. Every dog teaches me something new...what works for Lars doesn't always work for Ocean. What worked for Ocean doesn't always work for Lars. Toys made Lars too high with his drive...food is a better reward. Toys mean much, much more to Ocean than food...so if he gets a ball or a tug for something he has done well, I'm more likely to get that repeated in the show ring. His agility contacts and start line stays dramatically improved when I dumped food and started chucking toys at him instead. I don't even use food at all for him in agility training any more.

Lars thinks heeling is the most awesome thing in the world (well, that and scent articles)....and now he is damn good at it. When I started him out in obedience, instead of drilling heeling as formal heeling, I would incorporate a lot of play and games with the heeling. I always tell people you want to be so cool to your dog, they will choose working with you than looking at what is the distraction. When they do pay attention to you, reward that...you want the dog to think they get a bigger payoff by looking at you than the stuff on the floor or the dog in their peripheral vision. When I taught the Lars heeling...I kept heeling patterns very short, very dynamic, and very fun. I make a big deal out of heeling with attention with him and make it feel like he cured cancer with his heeling. LOL I always stopped working while they wanted to do more. My philosophy is to build the love for the work first and then polish with the precision. Does that make sense??

I like to think of this stuff like if I were a teacher. We've always had those teachers in high school or college who were as dry as dust....blah, blah, blah...reading from the text book is their lecture...asking the back row of the class to pay attention. You couldn't wait to get out of there if you showed up at all. Then we had the teachers who were so cool and fun....interactive with their lectures and examples of what they were teaching you. We all loved them and worked hard and studied hard for their tests...we were present for their class. We never missed the classes of the cool, hip and fun teachers. Training dogs is very much like this...what sort of teacher are you??


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Alla said:


> This is so awesome, thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Forget the cat as the object, probably a bad idea all the way around LOL. Unless it is a toy cat or some facsimile.

I assume many people in this thread have used a flirt pole to engage their dog's prey drive. ( toy drive as it is sometimes called to be more PC ) I wonder if you have tried this yet? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmlGbeIbemw

Finding an object which might get your dog to fixate on can be anything, yes even a piece of food if nothing else works. But you need to get the controlled focus on the object down solid, with all kinds of distractions. The anticipation of getting the object is what will hold the dog, if it shows no interest it is your job to find an object which will. 

I'm curious, does your dog stare at you or anyone while they are eating? Does your dog key on motion at times ? You kicking something with your feet, leaves blowing on the ground, throwing something, a squirrel, a bird, a plane or maybe Superman?


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I am completely lost as to what the point you are trying to make is.
> 
> All people are trying to say is since the OP's dog likes food right now and not toys, use the food to build drive for other things. If the dog doesn't have toy drive then using a ball on a string as the reward (er... mesmerizing object) isn't going to work.
> 
> Saying 'but you have a GSD!' still doesn't mean that the OP's dog operates like yours do.



Never did say that, others did. If I was the OP I'd use WHATEVER excites the dog except a live cat.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

K9 3X said:


> . And FWIW I know of some wonderful Mondioring Mals which were trained ab initio without any treats ( food ) however they were treated with engagement which eclipsed any food scrap, imagine that !


And I know of some wonderful GSD's that were actually TITLED to SchH III with V ratings, perhaps twenty-odd years ago, by using an ahem *purely* positive method that offers a _"hands-off, compulsion-free, positive-power approach to training" _ which merely requires _"myself, my dog, his favorite toy, a pocket full of cookies and smiles, and eyes and a mind taught to look for what the dog is doing right"_. ... So. Imagine that !

Mostly as a recommendation for the op since it does relate to companion training as well, think I'll blow the dust off this link and just leave it right here ... http://www.dogwise.com/ItemDetails.cfm?ID=DTB588


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

> Or is this only applicable at higher levels, i.e. past the point where a dog can figure out that the word "down" means the same as the gesture for down? lol


It's applicable for all levels. 

I will agree with petpeeve with one thing you said in your first post. 5 mins of drilling sit/down, sit/down, sit/down...I don't consider that to be a short exercise. I consider "short" being time frames of under 2 mins. The only real thing I drill with repetitions at this point with Lars is his Utility go outs because they need that to be maintained. How I handle things with Lars especially....if he nails an exercise in practice...we move on to the next thing I want to do. I don't do that same thing 4 more times just for the sake of doing it over. If I start doing the same thing over and over and over and he's been doing it correctly over and over and over....he will start inventing wrong things in that exercise. He thinks he's wrong and I'm looking for something different if I do something over and over and over again. If I did sit and down for 5 mins....he would start throwing in all sorts of kooky extras to sit and down because why else would I ask him to do the same thing over and over again.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

K9 3X said:


> Finding an object which might get your dog to fixate on can be anything, yes even a piece of food if nothing else works. But you need to get the controlled focus on the object down solid, with all kinds of distractions. The anticipation of getting the object is what will hold the dog, if it shows no interest it is your job to find an object which will.


 Personally I'm not a fan of allowing or encouraging the dog to fixate on anything other than me. Because, problems in the making.

I dunno. Maybe in IPO where there is a need and the dog can actually apply the skill. But for everyday training of attention, sit, down etc, not so much.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I think it can be hard at early levels particularly right after you get a new dog to really read them. You just got her and I believe she's your first dog, right? It's gonna take some time to really get a feel for what works best with your new dog. It can take 2 months or more for a dog to settle in. 

When I get a new dog I try to balance out learning things and also building drive/playing games. My first few days are basically just playing with them and teaching them about the clicker. I actually don't start with sit or down at all. I start with free shaping an object. I try to incorporate a lot of 'oh wow, aren't I fun!' into everything. Getting the new dog to realize 'hey this person is way cool and fun to play with' is my goal. I would rather have a dog know nothing but start to be realizing working me is fun than have a dog that can drill uninterestedly. 

5 minutes is a long session. Especially at first and especially drilling one thing. It's much better to go too short versus too long. You want to end a session before the dog loses interest and build duration over time. Sometimes if the dog gets something right once, then it's time to stop for that day. It's really easy to push too far too fast. I am definitely guilty sometimes.

My older dog, Summer, is not a dog that enjoys toys or physical play. She is older now and retired from agility save a fun run here and there (we did a trial last weekend for kicks but she doesn't actively train anymore). When we were training we used mostly food with her. Even now she will play with a tug- it's an odd kind of play and she never tugs- but that was done via shaping with food. I could even get her to work for a tug. And really nowadays she plays agility because it's fun for her and she gets pets and people clap for her when she's done. She is a big people pleaser. Never gonna be the fastest or most exciting dog (she's 11 so...) but you can watch her and see how rewarding the work is for her. That's my end goal with every dog. With Summer keeping things upbeat and very encouraging is the key. You must give her feedback all the time about when she's doing good because she wilts pretty easily.

I don't have to be so cheerleader-y with Hank because he is nuts about food and toys to a level Summer will never be. I just can't approach training non toy drivey Summer the same way. It's all about what works for YOUR team. I've had Hank 7 months and we're still nowhere near the communication level Summer and I have. That just takes time.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

As interesting as this discussion is, I'm not sure we're really helping the OP with her question. Building drive and motivation is great, and I think there was another post he/she started on that, but the question here was about teaching verbal cues. It sounds like there is just some gap in teaching the dog what is wanted and I don't think that gap will be bridged by increasing drive necessarily. 

Alla, have you had any more success with getting the verbal cue? If you ask for the down a couple times with the hand and verbal cue, then ask with just the verbal cue and wait her out, will she lie down?


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> I think it can be hard at early levels particularly right after you get a new dog to really read them. You just got her and I believe she's your first dog, right? It's gonna take some time to really get a feel for what works best with your new dog. It can take 2 months or more for a dog to settle in.
> 
> When I get a new dog I try to balance out learning things and also building drive/playing games. My first few days are basically just playing with them and teaching them about the clicker. I actually don't start with sit or down at all. I start with free shaping an object. .


I just saw in another thread that you've only had her a month. Okay....If I were you, I would be more focused on developing a good relationship with her before getting into hard core training (ie: drilling sits and downs for 5 mins.) I would definitely incorporate a lot of fun things like training games, playing with toys, building trust between the two of us. Worry about building a good and trusting relationship with her before more so than busting out very structured training right out of the gate. Learn how to play with your dog like a dog (chase games, stalking games)...learn to play with her with just yourself...no toys. That personal play builds good relationships with dogs. 

http://denisefenzi.com/2013/11/27/building-engagement-through-play/

Denise Fenzi is a master at building drive and desire in dogs to engage and work with their owners...she is one to bookmark and read often.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

MrsBoats said:


> I just saw in another thread that you've only had her a month. Okay....If I were you, I would be more focused on developing a good relationship with her before getting into hard core training (ie: drilling sits and downs for 5 mins.) I would definitely incorporate a lot of fun things like training games, playing with toys, building trust between the two of us. Worry about building a good and trusting relationship with her before more so than busting out very structured training right out of the gate. Learn how to play with your dog like a dog (chase games, stalking games)...learn to play with her with just yourself...no toys. That personal play builds good relationships with dogs.
> 
> http://denisefenzi.com/2013/11/27/building-engagement-through-play/
> 
> Denise Fenzi is a master at building drive and desire in dogs to engage and work with their owners...she is one to bookmark and read often.


There was actually another thread by the OP on this exact topic: 
http://www.dogforums.com/first-time-dog-owner/369218-games-play.html


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Honestly some dogs are just better at verbals than others. Summer is not one of them. Hank and Mia are. I think that plays a bigger role than anything in how fast a dog learns a verbal cue versus verbal + hand signal. If I lured a down- which I did with all 3 of mine, I just find it the easiest way to teach down- I fade the lure slowly. All 3 of mine have a hand moving down for a hand cue and it came from the lure. At first I will actually lure all the way down to the ground but gradually the distance I move my hand is shorter. I say the word 'down' (actually I use 'lie down' because it seems like dogs find that more distinctive?) while I'm doing so. Hank had both word and signal down in a session or two. Mia probably took a good dozen sessions to really grasp the word and she is STILL more reliable with the hand signal than the verbal. Summer relies the heaviest on body language and some of her verbal only commands have taken months to years- quite literally. 

I kind of think of it as how humans have various learning styles- some dogs are just more visual vs audio.

And every dog has their 'thing' that is hard to teach them. For Hank it is teaching him that sit means sit always. It does not mean sit then lie down. He anticipates that down like clockwork (my fault for the way I taught it). Lie down does not ALWAYS follow sit. Freaking hardest thing I've ever taught him and he's a dog that learned weave poles in just a few sessions.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

> We're about 20 sessions in, and I do not yet see any progress towards understanding the word "down". Is that normal? Am I doing something wrong?
> 
> *Also she is showing signs of being totally bored of repeating that training session over and over. High value treats are losing their value...*


This is why I brought up motivation...

I also think the timing and use of rewards can be extremely important to getting a point across to a dog about what you're looking for. If that timing and use is not there, I can see a dog struggle with figuring out what is being asked and then reliably do what is asked in the future. I use my food/toys and jackpots at very strategic times in order to communicate what the guys are doing correctly or incorrectly at the learning phase. I like my dogs to ask themselves, what did I do there to get that...and what do I need to do again in order to get that?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

elrohwen said:


> As interesting as this discussion is, I'm not sure we're really helping the OP with her question. Building drive and motivation is great, and I think there was another post he/she started on that, but the question here was about teaching verbal cues. It sounds like there is just some gap in teaching the dog what is wanted and I don't think that gap will be bridged by increasing drive necessarily.
> 
> Alla, have you had any more success with getting the verbal cue? If you ask for the down a couple times with the hand and verbal cue, then ask with just the verbal cue and wait her out, will she lie down?


I feel like the drive issue is connected to the verbal though. The sessions don't sound all that fun/engaging to me which is why you could see a dog uninterested in learning the verbal. Idk just my thoughts.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Laurelin said:


> I feel like the drive issue is connected to the verbal though. The sessions don't sound all that fun/engaging to me which is why you could see a dog uninterested in learning the verbal. Idk just my thoughts.


I totally agree that it's part of issue, but I think there is also likely some little thing that the OP is doing or not doing so that the dog is not grasping it. If the dog is doing it on a hand cue then the dog should be motivated enough to learn the verbal too if it's taught the right way. It might take more time or a different method, but I think that's what the OP is trying to figure out (at least in the initial post). 

A lot of talk about drive building and engagement is great too, but I don't think it's going to crack the code of getting the down on verbal cue only.

ETA: To me, it feels like we are making a lot of assumptions about what the OP's training sessions look like based on a few comments, and offering advice that may or may not be at the root of why the dog can't grasp the verbal cue. I just don't want to get so off topic talking about all of this great stuff when the OP still needs help with the mechanics and technique. OP, could get you a video of how you're training the down?


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> I feel like the drive issue is connected to the verbal though. The sessions don't sound all that fun/engaging to me which is why you could see a dog uninterested in learning the verbal. Idk just my thoughts.


^^^ I agree...

But also too...she's only had the dog a month. It may take a couple of months for the dog to figure out that a verbal means down without a signal. I think the expectations could be a little too high for the time she's had the dog. She may have to gradually fade the hand signal with the down and slowly replace it with the verbal. Sometimes formal heeling takes well over a year for a dog to really grasp that they are to maintain a specific position next to the handler's left side no matter where the handler is moving to. People sometimes forget things take time and sometimes a lot of time to teach. 

Alla....can you maybe video one of your training sessions so we can see what and how you're doing things??


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> I just don't want to get so off topic talking about all of this great stuff when the OP still needs help with the mechanics and technique. OP, could get you a video of how you're training the down?


Yup....video would be very helpful. (and get out of my head! LOL) I'm also basing some of my comments on what I have seen new dog handlers do and not do with teaching their dogs stuff in my classes over the years. Correct reward timing and use is something that a lot of new dog handlers struggle with. That also is aligned with that mystical "Feel the Dog" stuff I talk about on occasion. 

and, I seriously have to get back to work.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

MrsBoats said:


> But also too...she's only had the dog a month. It may take a couple of months for the dog to figure out that a verbal means down without a signal.


Yes, definitely agree with this. I think part of the problem is just high expectations, especially for a dog who doesn't seem to have been trained to know how to learn and offer behaviors. Could be a technique problem or could just be that the dog is getting it in her own time.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> Could be a technique problem or could just be that the dog is getting it in her own time.


Yes...and you cannot speed up a dog's own time frame either, you have to embrace it and work within it.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Oh for sure. Like I said it has taken Summer over a year sometimes to learn a verbal without a hand signal. Training in general just takes a lot of time.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Shoot, I should've seen the new posts before I went home for lunch... Just did a pretty nice training session, with a limit per command of 3 reps. I'll try to get a video tonight when I do another session.

I haven't really done more than 1 rep of down at a time since I started this thread, but she does offer it occasionally when I'm doing something with similar-looking gestures. So I'd guess there hasn't been any improvement towards verbal recognition since I haven't been practicing it. 

The reason I was doing such long sessions before (also keep in mind 5 minutes is an estimate, I never actually timed it) is because I had read that you want to get them into a space where they anticipate that the down command is coming, and you can't really do that with 3 reps. Now my sessions are probably about the same time length - at least the main slightly longer one I do at lunch - but have much more variety in them. For example, today we did basic stepping on a target (need for obedience class), a few reps of getting into heel position (also need for obedience class), 3 sits, 1 down from a stand, 1 down from a sit (both with gestures), 2 reps of heeling about 5 feet with a treat in my hand, and then about a minute or so of playing with the stuffed toy that I hope will eventually lead to flirt pole. Then we went for a walk and did a few (maybe 5 total on a 40min walk) reps of come (on leash). 

Yes I have tried the flirt pole (so has the trainer of my obedience class) and she doesn't even look at it. So we're focusing on pairing food with the toy, and she will do a few reps of that excitedly. Starts losing interest rather quickly though, but at least she'll pay attention to it now via the food, so haven't gone to putting the toy on the flirt pole yet, just move it away from her excitedly with my hand and body.

She will not focus on anything but the cat lol, at least not long-term. She won't focus on food. Or any toys or sounds that I've tried so far. 



> The sessions don't sound all that fun/engaging to me which is why you could see a dog uninterested in learning the verbal.


Lol quite possibly that is the issue. Training is very difficult for me psychologically. It is not fun for me, so I could definitely see how I'm failing to make it fun for the dog. Do I find it engaging, interesting, keeps me coming back to it time and time again? Sure. Fun? No.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Your recent session sounds like a lot more fun for her! I'd love to see a video if you can get one. I hate getting video of myself training but it's always helpful to watch back and see what I'm doing, even if I don't show it to anyone.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> I'm curious, does your dog stare at you or anyone while they are eating? Does your dog key on motion at times ? You kicking something with your feet, leaves blowing on the ground, throwing something, a squirrel, a bird, a plane or maybe Superman?


Out of all of those, only a squirrel, and even then its a very brief fixation without any leash pressure - just more kind of an "alert look". A single "let's go" from me is enough to break that stare. so far it really is only the cat lol. And only in my arms. The cat on the floor/another high place is still interesting, but not fixation-worthy.

Edit: actually no. Occasionally she will fixate on a specific other dog - especially off leash in a dog park. This is a hit or miss though, and needs another dog to execute lol.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

Laurelin said:


> Honestly some dogs are just better at verbals than others. Summer is not one of them. Hank and Mia are. I think that plays a bigger role than anything in how fast a dog learns a verbal cue versus verbal + hand signal.


Yeah. My dear departed mini schnauzer had a vocabulary of dozens of words, some of which were deliberately taught as commands, others of which she picked up on her own. She was just a word sponge. She could even do some word combinations.

Queenie knows basically no words. I'm not 100% sure she even knows her name. She does a lot of things well with hand signals, and she responds to voice TONE, but to her people talking seems basically meaningless. I suspect it's because she wasn't really around humans until she was about 9 months old. I'm pretty sure it's not just training failure, because in 13 years you'd expect a dog to at least pick up some words like "biscuit" or "outside" just in the normal course of living.

I think most dogs fall somewhere between the two extremes.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Alla said:


> Out of all of those, only a squirrel, and even then its a very brief fixation without any leash pressure - just more kind of an "alert look". A single "let's go" from me is enough to break that stare. so far it really is only the cat lol. And only in my arms. The cat on the floor/another high place is still interesting, but not fixation-worthy.
> 
> Edit: actually no. Occasionally she will fixate on a specific other dog - especially off leash in a dog park. This is a hit or miss though, and needs another dog to execute lol.



Hey, I have to offer up a huge apology to everyone as I just read something which to me, makes everything so much different. You have only had the dog for a month? Is that correct? If so, how old is the dog and what were the conditions regarding the dog's existence before you got her?


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

I was actually discussing people over thinking and trying way too hard in dog training with elrohwhen last week. For some people that is an easy trap to fall into...and then the joy of the process is lost for both the dog and the owner. You cannot lie to a dog...they know if you're not enjoying training or you are stressed about training. They will react accordingly. One of my favorite saying is "Our dogs are our amplifiers" What we feel and think comes down your leash and out through your dog. If you don't enjoy training your dog...she knows it. Before you find a way to make it fun for your dog...you need to find a way to make it fun for you. You won't be able to pretend that you're enjoying training her if you don't enjoy dog training. I've have always said, the moment that dog training is no longer fun for me....is the moment I stop dog training. If your feeling about dog training not being fun changes, you'll find your dog's attitude about working with you will probably get better too. 



elrohwen said:


> Your recent session sounds like a lot more fun for her! I'd love to see a video if you can get one. I hate getting video of myself training but it's always helpful to watch back and see what I'm doing, even if I don't show it to anyone.


I'm always training in front of a camera. Here are some videos I shot two years ago of me screwing around with drop on recall games for both Ocean and Lars. Lars knew it...Ocean didn't really it at the time this was shot (he does now.) Watch how I build the exercise in Ocean's video...games...build the exercise...games...build some more and by the end of three minutes and 37 seconds, there's something there that actually resembles an Open Drop on Recall. But its all fun, all relaxed and my guys are having fun as am I. Try to find the enjoyment in dog training...that's going to make a big difference.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I like video too. I take them a lot but rarely upload them. I just want to watch a time or two. Sometimes what I see is sloppiness I didn't realize in person, or I see signs that my dog is done and I should have ended earlier, sometimes I realize a session that felt really bad to me was actually not *that* bad at all. It's good practice to come back and objectively watch yourself. 



> Try to find the enjoyment in dog training...that's going to make a big difference.


+1

Remember training is play. You want your dog to have fun working with you!


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> You have only had the dog for a month? Is that correct? If so, how old is the dog and what were the conditions regarding the dog's existence before you got her?


That is correct. A month and a week, actually.  She is 3 years old, and she is a breeder return. She was bought as a puppy by a family, and then they returned her when they had to leave the country. Breeder had her for 3 months before we bought her. All I know is that she was a farm dog before. She shows signs of being very loved, well-socialized, well-mannered in the house and outside, very loving towards people. She shows a few signs of being scared of young children on our walks (but perfectly fine with my 6 year old sister when she comes to my house for a visit.. but my sister is a rather quiet child). She shows signs of either being corrected too much, or taught in a +P manner. She has gone through basic obedience as a puppy, but they haven't kept up her training. Also for a farm dog she shows phenomenal leash skills and basically no reactivity whatsoever. She is an excellent first dog. 



> You won't be able to pretend that you're enjoying training her if you don't enjoy dog training.


I would define enjoyable and fun as two different things. I find it enjoyable for sure. Its interesting, its engaging, I like seeing progress. But fun is different type of positive emotion. Its the emotion you feel when you laugh in play. I don't feel that when training.

Can't watch the videos right now but will when I get home from work!


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Alla said:


> I would define enjoyable and fun as two different things. I find it enjoyable for sure. Its interesting, its engaging, I like seeing progress. But fun is different type of positive emotion. Its the emotion you feel when you laugh in play. I don't feel that when training.


But I think you can get there! I have gone through stages where training was more interesting and less fun, usually when I was trying to get the hang of what the heck I was doing. The first year or two I don't know if training was actually "fun" for me in the same way you have mentioned.

Now that I have a better handle on my own mechanics, it is more fun. Today, for example, we went outside to do a session. I asked Watson to lie down and he refused, but instead ran over and jumped on me and tried to lick my face. So I asked him again, he refused again and jumped on me. So I just cuddled him and played with him and laughed with him, and then we moved on and did other stuff (and he did lie down). But we just had fun together, even though he wouldn't do the simple cue that I asked, because he was being silly and engaging with me. Training is a lot more fun when you can focus on what the dog is doing instead of what you are doing, but that takes time to get there.

In the mean time, I think it helps to break off training and really play. Not training games necessarily, but just play with a toy or use personal play if you feel like you're getting too serious or need to inject some fun. Later I think the fun comes more naturally, especially as the bond with your dog develops and you know how to have fun with each other. Eventually the training and play will kind of merge into one thing and you will both have more fun with it.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> Now that I have a better handle on my own mechanics, it is more fun. Today, for example, we went outside to do a session. I asked Watson to lie down and he refused, but instead ran over and jumped on me and tried to lick my face. So I asked him again, he refused again and jumped on me. So I just cuddled him and played with him and laughed with him, and then we moved on and did other stuff. But we just had fun together, even though he wouldn't do the simple cue that I asked, because he was being silly and engaging with me. Training is a lot more fun when you can focus on what the dog is doing instead of what you are doing, but that takes time to get there.


And you grasshopper....felt what Watson needed.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Did you get a chance to read this? It's really good.

http://denisefenzi.com/2013/11/27/building-engagement-through-play/


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

MrsBoats said:


> And you grasshopper....felt what Watson needed.


He just needed cuddles!!! haha

Though I will say it's so much easier to read what he needs when he gives me something instead of just standing there staring into space. That's when I'm kind of at a loss, and I sense the OP has the same issue sometimes based on past posts.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Laurelin said:


> Did you get a chance to read this? It's really good.
> 
> http://denisefenzi.com/2013/11/27/building-engagement-through-play/


There is also an online class to go along with that and I've heard good reviews. ETA: Laurelin, I know you know, but just for the OP or others who might not know about FDSA.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

I skimmed most of it Laurelin. I found it good in theory, like I agree playing is good lol, but lacking in specific instructions of what to do to build that play drive. 

The only things I remember sticking out is chasing with food (which I already do), experimentation (well, duh?), and I think flirt pole although hazy on that (which I'm slowly building towards already).

The questionnaire at the end was brilliant though, although I am rather confused about how to rate us using it. Her personal play with probably highest, but beyond chasing I haven't figured out how to do it yet. She doesn't enjoy wrestling, but she will chase me for a few minutes... Although quickly starts walking instead of running after me lol.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> He just needed cuddles!!! haha
> 
> Though I will say it's so much easier to read what he needs when he gives me something instead of just standing there staring into space. That's when I'm kind of at a loss, and I sense the OP has the same issue sometimes based on past posts.


Well, truth be told, I wouldn't know what a 3 year old dog I've only had a month truly needs from me either. That's where relationship and trust becomes important. I don't feel I truly **know** my dogs until they are about 18 months to 2.5 years old....and I've had them from puppies. Ocean and I didn't really click together until he was a little over 2.5 years old...and I had brought him home when he was 10 weeks old. Relationships and trust aren't built in a month and sometimes not even within a year.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

If it sounds like I have a tough time reading her, that's because I do lol.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Man, yeah. I feel like Thud and I are just now starting to reach the point where we can work together - and I've had him since he was 6 weeks old and he'll be 2.5 next month. And when I say just starting to get it/him? Yeah. I mean, it's been coming since he was 2 but we're not there, yet. Kylie and I, and Molly and I, started clicking together pretty fast, comparatively, but the dog has to be comfortable enough to show a personality, old enough to HAVE a solid personality, and be with you long enough for you to predict/read/know what that is and work out the nuances. It ain't fast.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Alla said:


> If it sounds like I have a tough time reading her, that's because I do lol.


And that's normal! Some dogs don't give much to go on at first (at least a dog jumping around like a loon is giving you information about how they feel), and as a first time dog owner it's going to be extra hard. I feel like my working bond has developed in fits and starts over the last 2.5 years. Sometimes awesome, sometimes "who the heck are you, dog?", but we always move closer to awesome. I've always loved him and he's always been my buddy, but being able to work together and read each other and trust each other is a longer road than the bond required to snuggle together on the couch.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

And trust each other? 

OMG, TRUST THE DOG is the. hardest. thing. for me. Even with Kylie, who is almost 3 and I've been doing some kind of formal/sports training with for more than a year. Loosening up and trusting her to do her job is rough. Unfortunately not doing it kind of messes things up royally more often than not. 

I don't trust Molly further than I can throw her. Not helping anything, but definitely something I have to work on :/


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Well… yeah lol. Naturally I haven’t developed a relationship with her yet. I can’t read her well. She’s my first dog, and I’m finding training dogs and horses to be so different in terms of timelines and expectations and results that it’s throwing me for a loop with the dog. 

However, plenty of people are capable of teaching the fundamentals of basic obedience within weeks of getting their puppies/new dogs. I know boarding trainers who earn a living by training a dog (of any age) from nothing to off-leash basic obedience in a park in under 2 months. 

While I am not comparing myself to them, it should be entirely feasible for me to teach a down within a month of owning my dog lol.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Alla said:


> I skimmed most of it Laurelin. I found it good in theory, like I agree playing is good lol, but lacking in specific instructions of what to do to build that play drive.
> 
> The only things I remember sticking out is chasing with food (which I already do), experimentation (well, duh?), and I think flirt pole although hazy on that (which I'm slowly building towards already).
> 
> The questionnaire at the end was brilliant though, although I am rather confused about how to rate us using it. Her personal play with probably highest, but beyond chasing I haven't figured out how to do it yet. She doesn't enjoy wrestling, but she will chase me for a few minutes... Although quickly starts walking instead of running after me lol.


The chasing you is good! How do you play chase? 

If you know she enjoys chase for 2 minutes and then slows down YOUR job is to stop before she slows down. So you chase for a minute and a half. Leave her wanting more fun. Wild wild wild chase and when she catches you give her a treat. Lots of pets, praise, fun.

Do you have someone that can restrain her for restrained recalls? That is one of my first drive building exercises. 

The important thing from the article is to be more active rather than just handing the dog a treat.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Depends on the dog. 

For one, a lot of those boarding places work with e-collars (as in electric/shock collars) and corrections, and the dog is in a state of semi-shut down and it's basically boot camp and really rough on the dog *and* it's hard for the owners to maintain that at home. 

For another, honestly? It took me something like 2 years to teach my rat terrier to lay down reliably with only a verbal command. Why? He didn't like lying down, he's incredibly soft, and he's not overly bright. He's also not food motivated, kind of stubborn, and had been compulsion trained to the degree that he hates training. My relationship with him involves very little training. He's a naturally well behaved dog, he doesn't do bad things, and frankly I'm not willing to stress both of us to push it. So I teach him a little sometimes when he is okay but mostly we cuddle and, when he's willing to play, play. 

Which, really, for him usually means 'kill small fuzzy things', but I'm cool with that.

I COULD probably do more with him, and have quite a bit of success with a slow time table using advice here but he's one of five and I'm not all that highly motivated myself so. Mostly we go into the woods, he kills things, or runs, and then he snuggles up with me a LOT.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Alla said:


> Well… yeah lol. Naturally I haven’t developed a relationship with her yet. I can’t read her well. She’s my first dog, and I’m finding training dogs and horses to be so different in terms of timelines and expectations and results that it’s throwing me for a loop with the dog.
> 
> However, plenty of people are capable of teaching the fundamentals of basic obedience within weeks of getting their puppies/new dogs. I know boarding trainers who earn a living by training a dog (of any age) from nothing to off-leash basic obedience in a park in under 2 months.
> 
> While I am not comparing myself to them, it should be entirely feasible for me to teach a down within a month of owning my dog lol.


She does know a down though, right? She just needs the visual cue as well as the verbal. That's a good start!


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> The chasing you is good! How do you play chase?
> 
> If you know she enjoys chase for 2 minutes and then slows down YOUR job is to stop before she slows down. So you chase for a minute and a half. Leave her wanting more fun. Wild wild wild chase and when she catches you give her a treat. Lots of pets, praise, fun.


Good point on stopping early.  She follows me around the house naturally (much more so than she'll follow boyfriend), so occasionally I'll capitalize on that and start calling her name excitedly and in general blabbering on in an excited tone of voice. Then as soon as she's looking at me I'll turn around and dash away from her until I can't run any further, and she'll chase me. Then I'll turn around, give her a treat (or just a vigorous pet), and run past her in another direction, and she'll chase me again. 



> Do you have someone that can restrain her for restrained recalls? That is one of my first drive building exercises.
> 
> The important thing from the article is to be more active rather than just handing the dog a treat.


How do you do a restrained recall properly? Do you give the come command while the dog is prevented from executing it or just be excited and call her name and say other things and then only give the come command upon/just before the release?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Restrained recall basically means someone holding the dog and watching you go, ramping them up while they're prevented from getting to you, and then giving the recall command and the other person lets them go. Reward when they reach you.

It's one situation where straining at the end of a leash is NOT bad.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> Restrained recall basically means someone holding the dog and watching you go, ramping them up while they're prevented from getting to you, and then giving the recall command and the other person lets them go.


Okay yeah, but when do you actually give the "come" command?

Edit: oh wait you mentioned that. So no using the command during the ramping up stage?


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I wouldn't worry too much about the actual command. Get her worked up, call her name, call her pup, make silly noises, whatever, and then have someone release her to come to you. The formal command can come later once you have the enthusiasm and she knows what you want, you're just trying to get her excited to run to you when you make silly noises.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

Laurelin said:


> She does know a down though, right? She just needs the visual cue as well as the verbal. That's a good start!


Yeah my foster pup doesn't know the verbal command for half the things I've taught her so far but I certainly wouldn't say she doesn't know the commands. We are in various stages of fading the lure and adding the verbal command in most of her tricks. Honestly she isn't that great at picking up on verbal cues and might not get most of them before she gets adopted. Not really that big a deal. I'm pretty sure most potential adopters won't even keep up with half the things I've taught her. The one thing I've really stressed the most is something adopters will probably get the most use out of even if they don't realize it. Teaching her to "wait" for things. She waits for release to eat her food, waits for release to get water when I refill the bowl (after her jumping up and causing me to spill it the second time that became a big point), she waits for me to put her harness and leash on, waits to calmly before I let her out of her crate. They may never use the verbal cue but she's got a pretty decent habit of waiting for some cue, verbal or gesture, before doing a lot of things now. 

Keep up the good effort you putting in with her. You are building that relationship and things will get easier as you both learn to communicate with each other better. It will happen it just takes more time than you expected and that is okay.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

elrohwen said:


> I wouldn't worry too much about the actual command. Get her worked up, call her name, call her pup, make silly noises, whatever, and then have someone release her to come to you. The formal command can come later once you have the enthusiasm and she knows what you want, you're just trying to get her excited to run to you when you make silly noises.


Yeah, that. 

Or if you do really want to use the command, honestly doesn't much matter. When she's frustrated and trying to get to you and has a little way to run. If you try it and she gives up and doesn't get eager/excited then do less taunting or a closer distance or more, just depending. The goal is just to get her worked up about wanting to get to you. To start with the dog knowing you have food (or a toy, or whatever) often helps.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Restrained recall: Someone else will hold the dog. You get a ways away and have a toy/food that the dog wants and basically make a fool of yourself. Be exciting, make the dog want to come to you. I will call out (happily, not a yell!) Hank! or 'Hank! Come!' then the helper lets go of the dog and you sprint away from the dog. Dog gets rewarded with food/play or toy/play when they catch you. You only release the dog when the dog is focused on you.


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Alla said:


> That is correct. A month and a week, actually.  She is 3 years old, and she is a breeder return. She was bought as a puppy by a family, and then they returned her when they had to leave the country. Breeder had her for 3 months before we bought her. All I know is that she was a farm dog before. She shows signs of being very loved, well-socialized, well-mannered in the house and outside, very loving towards people. She shows a few signs of being scared of young children on our walks (but perfectly fine with my 6 year old sister when she comes to my house for a visit.. but my sister is a rather quiet child). She shows signs of either being corrected too much, or taught in a +P manner. She has gone through basic obedience as a puppy, but they haven't kept up her training. Also for a farm dog she shows phenomenal leash skills and basically no reactivity whatsoever. She is an excellent first dog.
> 
> 
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Video time! This is faaaaairly typical of our recent training sessions. There are 3 downs in there, among other stuff. She was showing a lot less interest in the toy than she was showing today at lunch as you can see me comment on in the video lol. My timing was off a bunch of times... The target thing slides around my floor so I have to hold it with my foot in order for Porsche to be able to use it lol. I just started using this target today, need to put a rubber bottom on it or something.

This is a little bit more haphazard than normal, usually I'd do a few reps of an exercise before moving to something else. But this is what happens when I don't focus on that lol, its all very... "hrm what's next.. oh how about this!" lol. 

Also side note... isn't she so pretty?  *fangirls*

Also, another side note, if you visit my channel from the video, you'll see some of my clicker training with horses. In case anyone finds that interesting too.  [If the stuff with the paint, Outlaw, looks unimpressive, it might put it into perspective to know that for the first month of training sessions outside, he refused to acknowledge my existence, all the way to refusing to take freely offered food.]

Anywayyyyyy, dog!


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Alla said:


> Edit... how do you get the video to show up as a video instead of a link?


you will put 




delete the (space)






Haven't watched yet.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Laurelin said:


> you will put
> 
> 
> 
> ...


URGH not showing!

Instead of parenthesis use brackets.

(youtube)Z9DkGoJZXy0(/youtube)


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Thank you!! Got it.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

I got though about 1:45 and my connection in my basement office is acting up. Just an initial thought...you're doing a verbal click with your mouth, right? Like clucking at a horse? (I rode ponies and children's hunters before college) 

I don't know if that "cluck" noise would make as much as an impact as an actual clicker in your hand would. I think it gets lost in the speaking you're doing...it just blends in with you talking. I don't know if it works (right now) as a marker word/noise. She's not getting enough of a mark on correct behavior. I would totally move to an actual clicker you hold in your hand. That sound is distinct and dogs can recognize it very quickly after the sound has been loaded and associated with rewards. If you have an actual clicker...that may help her learn something faster. 

I do have a marker word of "YES!" in place of a clicker when I can't use one. But I totally change the tone and the intensity of the YES to positive and louder if I'm using it as a marker word...there's a distinction in YES! versus my speaking tone and intensity. So, the boys notice it and it doesn't get lost in my chatter at them.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

An actual clicker is in the mail.  Never tried using it but going to try specifically for the reasons you mentioned.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

Good! I think you're going to see quicker results with that clicker than the click/cluck with your mouth. You might want to try and load an animated "yes" with her too as a marker word. With time and a solid relationship between the two of you...the yes marker word will work in place of a clicker if you don't have it handy. 

I use clickers a lot in training....I use them to tighten and clean up exercises where correct position means something (like points off.) They are really effective in that way. I used clickers to teach weave poles and contacts in agility too.


----------



## trainingjunkie (Feb 10, 2010)

So much of your work looks perfect! Great stuff! But I would not work on that flooring. I think you would get more energy if you were on something that was not hard or slippery. My dogs would be very cautious if I was working on tile or linoleum. It would change my training picture a lot.

Nice work and wonderful dog! You are so going to get this!


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

trainingjunkie said:


> So much of your work looks perfect! Great stuff! But I would not work on that flooring. I think you would get more energy if you were on something that was not hard or slippery. My dogs would be very cautious if I was working on tile or linoleum. It would change my training picture a lot.
> 
> Nice work and wonderful dog! You are so going to get this!


Thank you!  Unfortunately I only have carpeting on stairs (lol), but I've been thinking about getting an area rug. It would never be as large as a full room though... Otherwise its just outside on a leash lol, and that has its own challenges (although I do that as well).


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

I just re-watched it again and she is sliding around a ton, isn't she... Even the sits are hard to hold on this floor. :\ Bah. Well, helps me in training the down. 

Also I just did another little session of playing with toy and she did so much better than in the video!  (Mind you I engaged her when she was in the middle of playing with the cat, so she was already in a playful mood.) We even progressed to the point of her grabbing the toy with her mouth briefly, which is the first time that's happened.  And after I jackpotted that, she then did it two more times and I ended the session.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

Looks good! Some dogs can be a bit slow and cautious on hard surfaces, and over time they can form the habit of doing everything slowly. But if you just try to do a lot of the stuff outside on grass it should be fine. A large rug works too, you'd just have limited space, but that's ok for most tricks and obedience stuff.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Really nice! There's a lot of good stuff there! She does clearly know sit and down on hand cues so I think it will just take time for her to get the verbal cue. I would not say that most dogs get stuff like that on verbal cue only within a month, especially if it is their first month training. 

I agree with the others that less slippery flooring will help her speed and confidence.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Thank you! You know, I'm really flattered that most of you really accomplished trainers think that the only major thing wrong with my technique is the floor lol.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I think if you get better flooring, you'll be able to get more energy and engagement out of her. She looks like she's enjoying herself and wants to work with you.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

I feel like sometimes she's doing something I'm asking for, but she's not getting what she's doing that's getting her the treat, even though I think I'm pretty consistent both with my click, praise, and treat. (Actually I'm not even sure she gets the click = treat thing at all as MrsBoats said, despite it being a distinct sound, it having been loaded, and me having trained with it consistently for a while now.) For example I can lure her onto the floor target no problem. Remove the lure - remove the treat from the hand and use just the hand - and she looks at the hand briefly then back at me expectantly, unsure of what to do. Change my position from directly in front of her to 5cm to the side, and she's lost again. 

I just feel like I'm either expecting too much from her (i.e. well you're clearly doing what I want, you're getting rewarded for the exact thing you're doing right, why does my body position matter to within centimeters? even horses, which are much more body language and position oriented, are more forgiving than that), or I'm failing to be clear with my explanation? I understand dogs aren't great at generalizing, well, neither are horses lol, but come on. 

I just feel like every time she steps on that target, its because it just happened to be in the way of where she was going to step anyways, and there's nothing deliberate about it. No understanding.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I did notice that you were clicking a bit late towards the beginning of the video. I wasn't able to watch the whole thing with sound, so I'm not sure if that got better. But I agree that she doesn't really seem to associate it with rewards yet and I'm not sure your timing is right on. I think an actual clicker will help.

Have you tried purely shaping her for interacting with an object? She may not understand that objects out in the training area are something she should focus on. I would get an object, put it behind my back, whip it out and present to the dog, and click for the dog looking at it in any way. Teach her that when you bring something out and she looks at it or moves towards it, that's a good thing. Then you can progress to putting the object on the ground and clicking for her showing any interest in it.

For front foot targeting, it may also help to use something with some height, like an overturned bowl. I like the heavy black rubber ones that people use for feeding horses, though in more of a dog bowl size (I got mine at the feed store). The extra height will make it more clear to her when she's on it or not. I've tried teaching targeting like that with a frisbee and my dog just did not get when his feet were on it or not, but moving to a bowl made things much more clear for him.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Here's what I'd do.

If you're teaching sit, down, and release ... get another mat similar to the one at your entrance way. Carpeted top, rubber backed, maybe about 36" x 60" or so in size. Use that for a more comfortable place to train these behaviours on. It'll be easily portable, so you can use it in your kitchen, or your front hall, your dining room etc if you wish.

For now, totally forget the idea of front feet on a target. There's no real need for that at this stage of the game. Just use the entrance mat and let your dog find her own comfort zone, whether it's in rough front or rough heel or whatever. Concentrate on the one behavior you're looking for, in this case merely sit.

Use a clicker, as previously suggested, and a food lure. Nothing else. No voice, no "good girl", no encouragement, no body movement, no foot movement, no praise, no nrm etc. Just the food and the clicker. Be absolutely silent, and allow the food and the clicker to do ALL of the communicating. Lure the dog into position, keeping in mind what your final hand signal will be. *sit* <> click / feed / release EACH TIME. Repeat 3 times. On the fourth time do the exact same thing but keep the treat in your opposite hand, lure with the empty hand, when the dog *sits* <> click / quickly feed from the opposite hand / release. You might want to dispense a small jackpot from your left hand at this point, maybe 2 or 3 treats in succession. Play with your dog for a minute, praise her and tell her she's such a good dog!, then start up again. But this time, use the lure in your right hand only ONCE to begin, then do more three reps of luring with an empty right hand and feeding from the left hand. Play again with your dog for a minute. Repeat the process once more, 4 reps total, using empty right hand only as signal and clicking/feeding each time from the left hand. In other words fade the lure, progressively.

Call it a day. Until next session. Then do the same procedure as above, with down / release.

Your releases are absolutely terrific! but I'd use one each time to end each sit or down, whatever the case may be.

Personally, I think you should get the simple mechanics of sit and down really REALLY solid and fluent first, before you even think about attaching a verbal cue to either one. You're close but you're just not quite there yet. JMO. Keep at it though, looking good!


eta: Your signal for down looks way too similar to your sit signal, at times. Consider devising/ using signals that are consistent, clear, concise and DISTINCT, so it makes things easier for your dog to distinguish the difference between them and associate them with their respective behaviour.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> For front foot targeting, it may also help to use something with some height, like an overturned bowl. I like the heavy black rubber ones that people use for feeding horses, though in more of a dog bowl size (I got mine at the feed store). The extra height will make it more clear to her when she's on it or not. I've tried teaching targeting like that with a frisbee and my dog just did not get when his feet were on it or not, but moving to a bowl made things much more clear for him.


This was much more clear for her, thank you for the idea.  I put the same brown mat thing onto a ~chest-high box, and did a bunch of luring onto it yesterday evening, and she seems to get it much more.  Definitely much less centimeter-specific. Awesome!



> Have you tried purely shaping her for interacting with an object? She may not understand that objects out in the training area are something she should focus on. I would get an object, put it behind my back, whip it out and present to the dog, and click for the dog looking at it in any way. Teach her that when you bring something out and she looks at it or moves towards it, that's a good thing. Then you can progress to putting the object on the ground and clicking for her showing any interest in it.


Well I guess I did that with the toy I'm trying to teach her to play with? But that's the only thing so far. But I'm seeing good progress with that too, she gets rather animated with her front paws trying to get the toy, and will grab it out of my hand with her mouth if I raise it a little higher. 



> If you're teaching sit, down, and release ... get another mat similar to the one at your entrance way. Carpeted top, rubber backed, maybe about 36" x 60" or so in size. Use that for a more comfortable place to train these behaviours on. It'll be easily portable, so you can use it in your kitchen, or your front hall, your dining room etc if you wish.


Yep, I've got another one of those (that's actually the mat I use for class), so I've started using that since the video. I was going to try to train outside but its been on-and-off hailing/snowing/raining so wasn't very motivated to train... I did re-introduce her to our backyard though, which has been inaccessible throughout the winter.

Even that mat will slide around on my floors though, unless I stand on it lol. But its better for stationary stuff, much easier for her to sit. 

Oh btw I found a new favourite treat - hotdogs! Boyfriend is a huge hotdog hater and at first refused to let me feed the dog "such junk" even in small doses, but caved in yesterday and Porsche was happy (and so was I lol). She's getting more confident in getting into heel position and also in following me in the heel position. Which is awesome cause last time in class we were such a mess with heeling that trainer recommended I have her wear a choke chain next class so she at least doesn't pull me off my feet in random directions while i'm trying to stuff a treat in her face to get her attention... She's great at LLW in general, not so great at doing it in close proximity to me + other dogs lol.



> Use a clicker, as previously suggested, and a food lure. Nothing else. No voice, no "good girl", no encouragement, no body movement, no foot movement, no praise, no nrm etc. Just the food and the clicker. Be absolutely silent, and allow the food and the clicker to do ALL of the communicating. Lure the dog into position, keeping in mind what your final hand signal will be. *sit* <> click / feed / release EACH TIME. Repeat 3 times. On the fourth time do the exact same thing but keep the treat in your opposite hand, lure with the empty hand, when the dog *sits* <> click / quickly feed from the opposite hand / release. You might want to dispense a small jackpot from your left hand at this point, maybe 2 or 3 treats in succession. Play with your dog for a minute, praise her and tell her she's such a good dog!, then start up again. But this time, use the lure in your right hand only ONCE to begin, then do more three reps of luring with an empty right hand and feeding from the left hand. Play again with your dog for a minute. Repeat the process once more, 4 reps total, using empty right hand only as signal and clicking/feeding each time from the left hand. In other words fade the lure, progressively.


Thank you for the very precise instructions! I will try this today at lunch and film it, see how it goes.  Err, well, without the actual clicker, cause its still in the mail. Supposed to be delivered tomorrow if Amazon isn't lying...



> Your releases are absolutely terrific! but I'd use one each time to end each sit or down, whatever the case may be.


Thank you! I personally was thinking that they were rather sloppy though... I do use a release at least a billion times a day outside of training sessions (i.e. sit/release to go outside, sit/release to cross the street, sit/release to get food or a treat, come back in the house/wait/wipe feet/unclip leash/wait/release, come/release, etc...). I'm not sure if she understands the word as the release yet, or if its more my body language i.e. moving away/arms up/smile, something like that. 



> Your signal for down looks way too similar to your sit signal, at times. Consider devising/ using signals that are consistent, clear, concise and DISTINCT, so it makes things easier for your dog to distinguish the difference between them and associate them with their respective behaviour.


I think that's because I only used the sit signal like once or twice... Most of the time I was using just the verbal sit (which she knows what it means when she is in front). What did you think was my sit signal (maybe I was doing something unconsciously)? Sit signal is right arm bent at elbow, held straight up with palm facing forward. Down signal is finger of right hand pointing straight down (usually with arm hanging loose or around my belly).

But I do agree my signals could use tightening up for sure. I.e. the signal for going on the mat is very similar to the down signal, i'm surprised she hasn't been confusing that. I'm trying to use an open hand pointing to the mat instead of the finger straight down.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

Here’s a video, as promised. I haven’t re-watched it yet, but I think I made every mistake in the book. My timing was really bad, I forgot to click half the time, used about a billion more “good girl”s than was supposed to, my position was off, gestures? what gestures, feeding from the wrong hand… I was really nervous for some reason to be in front of camera (cause you know, being nervous ALWAYS helps to do things correctly…), and so I was a complete mess. Porsche was great though. 

And then we went for our lunch walk and I think had the worst walk ever. We met basically every dog in the neighbourhood I think, and ever since I stopped letting her meet other dogs on leash (and we stopped going to the dog park), she’s gotten more and more interested in them. She was practically pulling me off my feet, I could not get her attention at all, eventually I ended up dragging her down a secluded driveway behind tall bushes, forcing her into a sit facing away from the road, and staying like that for a few minutes before the coast cleared and we ran for the house. It was really bad…

Together with the horrible training session, I almost cried on my way back to work from lunch. Ugh. And now I'm in an excellent frame of mind for my upcoming private agility lesson at 5pm today...  Thankfully I had the wits to not sign up for a group class.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

We've all had horrible dog training days! I'm also really bad when the camera is on - I can turn a great training session into a terrible one the second the camera starts rolling.

One thing that helps I think is to have more of a plan when you video. I can think on my feet ok normally, but when the camera is on I just kind of randomly go from one thing to the next and it's all confusion. If I have a specific objective, like show this one thing that we do, or work on these three skills, then it's much better.

I think she's engaging with you really nicely! She's not wandering off or getting bored with the session. She does seem to be getting tired near the end so I would probably shorten up the session and spread the training over a few different times.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

> One thing that helps I think is to have more of a plan when you video. I can think on my feet ok normally, but when the camera is on I just kind of randomly go from one thing to the next and it's all confusion. If I have a specific objective, like show this one thing that we do, or work on these three skills, then it's much better.


Lol I think what happened is I had a super specific plan - i.e. what petpeeve outlined - and then when it wasn't going exactly as planned and I lost count of the reps and she started anticipating, I panicked and just went all over the place. :\



> I think she's engaging with you really nicely! She's not wandering off or getting bored with the session. She does seem to be getting tired near the end so I would probably shorten up the session and spread the training over a few different times.


Lol yeah she totally made it look like I didn't screw up all thaaaat badly. Oh the magic of hotdogs. 
Totally agreed, it was way too long of a session. :\


----------



## K9 3X (Apr 17, 2015)

Alla,

You are a month and half into the process, you already have established a connection with the dog which will only grow by leaps and bounds, especially if you continue on your quest to engage Porsche at the level you describe. All I have heard from you, is that you are committed to the dog and take an active role in training her, you will not lose with that approach. You and Porsche have great days ahead, guaranteed by your enthusiasm and realistic expectations. Look it, Porsche has not had the best deal in life previously, she's on her third rehoming BUT when the switch goes on 100% with her and she shows her true spirit, you will have something which will grace your life which you might not imagine right now. In the video, I see a dog that has nothing but greatness to offer but is a bit reluctant to be herself completely, maybe because of her past. I have no doubts that you will win this dog's heart and she will win yours. You will never lose by trying and all I see is you trying so generously. Cherish every moment with her.


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

K9 3X said:


> Alla,
> 
> You are a month and half into the process, you already have established a connection with the dog which will only grow by leaps and bounds, especially if you continue on your quest to engage Porsche at the level you describe. All I have heard from you, is that you are committed to the dog and take an active role in training her, you will not lose with that approach. You and Porsche have great days ahead, guaranteed by your enthusiasm and realistic expectations. Look it, Porsche has not had the best deal in life previously, she's on her third rehoming BUT when the switch goes on 100% with her and she shows her true spirit, you will have something which will grace your life which you might not imagine right now. In the video, I see a dog that has nothing but greatness to offer but is a bit reluctant to be herself completely, maybe because of her past. I have no doubts that you will win this dog's heart and she will win yours. You will never lose by trying and all I see is you trying so generously. Cherish every moment with her.


Thank you. Thank you so much. <3 I really needed to hear that.  It helps to know that I'm not majorly screwing her up and that I'm on the right track and it's just down to time and consistency. 

Also we had our first agility lesson yesterday - omg so much fun! Porsche took the tunnel like a pro, and within a few run-throughs it even became a safe place for her.  Was a master of the platform (cause we did that already, ha! I was like "go on mark!" and she was like "okay, how many feet would you like?"), and totally rocked the tire jump. Soooo I put in a request to the trainer to join one of her group classes. I mean, we'll see how it goes with another dog in the class (it would be a young hyper Malinois we'd be joining), and they haven't yet agreed to let us join them, but we'll see.  The trainer is super nice, so much nicer than my obedience trainer, and the venue is inside and has a super nice setup. 

I think Porsche is starting to bond with me.  When we were at the part of introducing the tunnel where I'd send her and the trainer would offer her treats on the other end, she'd come out, grab the treat quickly, and then beeline back to me at the start of the tunnel. And then at one point I had to run out of the arena to my car and take some medication, so I asked the trainer to hold her, and trainer said that she was concerned, and looking for me, and watching the door I exited through the whole time I was gone. And then when I came back in she acted super excited to see me. I was so flattered hahaha!

She really seemed to enjoy the different obstacles - the only time she wouldn't take the tire jump is when I led her up to it completely wrong. And she'd go out of her way to take the tunnel even if I messed up with my approach completely lol. 

And what was awesome about this trainer is that her response to me apologizing for all of my mistakes was "Well I'm happy you're human!" And the trainer really liked Porsche as well - how respectful she was in her greeting, her general demeanour and willingness to try, how quickly she got all the new activities, and how sweet she is.  She's also a conformation judge (not sure how serious), but she said Porsche is very well built for a GSD, and at a perfect weight as well. And she couldn't get over her tail lol! Cause her tail is so long that it drags on the ground, people often remark on her tail. 

So yeah... If all works out, I'll be doing agility classes too.  Maybe its just me, but Agility seems a lot more like a partnership to me than obedience? I mean, I don't know if I can call my basics of dining room sliding "obedience", but it seems like there its a lot more "I am teaching you how to X when I do Y", whereas in agility the dog has to actually go out and do the obstacle on their own, properly, and.. I dunno, it just seems that because you're working at a bigger distance from the dog, that they have more freedom to blow you off so they -really- have to want to work with you and listen to you? Lol yeah that didn't make much sense to me either. 

But... yay agility!

Also, re: walks, I've started carrying treats on my walks. That way I can train her come better (she is now at the point where she will turn around and come to me without any leash pressure when she hears the word ), and if we see other dogs, I have a better chance of distracting her and keeping her attention on me instead of 180-ing in tight spaces or, worse, dragging her off somewhere. Also she's strong. x_x


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Congrats on your agility class! That is so awesome!

I think that agility is certainly more faced paced, seat of the pants kind of sport. It is also more variable since you can have an infinite variety of courses to run and things to work on.

Obedience is certainly more regimented and the trial is pretty much the same every time with the same exercises. However at higher levels three are a lot of situations where the dog has to work away from you and take your cues at a distance. Obedience is also very precise which I think people love or hate about it. Personally I prefer Rally, which offers the fun of training heeling and pivots and things, but without having to be so precise and without doing the same routine every time. 

Another problem with obedience is that a lot of competitors and trainers are still pretty old school. Even if they use positive methods they may not be building drive and working dogs who are really happy and excited to be there, which makes it seem kind of slow and boring. Watching a dog who is really excited and into the obedience routine is awesome though. I think more people are starting to train for that which is great. In agility they have been training for that from the beginning.

ETA: Since you're in horses, I think the best analogy is dressage vs show jumping. To a newbie or an outside show jumping seems far more exciting and interesting, but once you really get into riding and enjoy the process, dressage is really fun too in a different way.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Agility is so much fun! You guys will have a blast and it will really help you learn how to work together!


----------



## Alla (Mar 25, 2015)

As a small update, I haven't been drilling down much, but she's showing at least some verbal literacy, more than it might seem from this thread. 

I use a lot of verbal cues for walking, mostly because she can't see me if she's out in front of me. 

"Gentle" means "you're about to run into the end of the leash, slow down if you don't want to run into it", which I introduced when we got the flexi leash. It's purely +P cue, cause she's nowhere near for me to actually treat her for slowing down. (She's also not running full out, just going at a slightly faster pace than my walk, so the end of the leash is equivalent to a mild collar pop.)

"Wait" means "stop and don't move", which I trained by physically preventing her from continuing forward with leash pressure, walking up to her and feeding her a treat. So she has learned that "wait" means "stop, treat is coming". I use this for crossing roads and untangling her from the line. This cue is a lot more flakey than "gentle", but she has shown that she understands the verbal command. 

"Okay" is our release cue and she definitely knows that one. 

Then there's of course the "good girl" and "no", but those aren't walk specific.

Still no luck with "down" though...

But she's getting really good with going on platforms.  I think our distance record for a deliberate "go on mark" is around 2-3 meters.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

That's awesome! Glad you guys are doing so well! She'll get there with "down" eventually.


----------

