# Obedience and Agility question about sendaways and contacts



## Minky (Dec 6, 2016)

I'm totally open to all suggestions for this training issue - I am unsure how to proceed with it. 

I do agility and obedience - I have a fantastic dog who does very well in both, (but even if she didn't I would still love her to bits!!) 
When I trained her for the obedience sendaway I taught her to run out to a mat/piece of carpet and gave the 'mat' command (so she would go down onto the mat) - gradually increasing the distance and fading/decreasing the size of the mat. 

She isn't a super fast dog so when I was teaching her agility contacts, I used a 'freeze' or stop command, she would instantly slow down and stop on the contact area of the A frame etc then I would release her with an 'okay' and on we would go around the course. 

I am now training my new puppy (14 months old). She is faster than my other dog and very high drive. I will need to teach her to target the contact area of the dog walk etc by using a tile/mat or whatever for a target article, she will be too fast to stop on the right area with just a command. 

I cannot see how to teach her to drop down on a target article (mat/square or whatever) for the sendaway, but teach her just to put her front feet or nose on a target article for teaching agility contacts, without confusing her. 

I don't want to use just a pole for teaching her to 'run out and drop' for the sendaway (instead of a mat), because competition sendaways are often set up between poles or ring stakes, so I don't want her looking for a pole every time she does a sendaway. 

I'd be most grateful for any suggestions about training for the two different scenarios without creating confusion, or how others have trained for this?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

You don't need a mat OR a down to teach an agility contact and it won't confuse obedience at all. I'm pretty limited right now but search google or youtube for two on two off contact training. Your target for that usually starts with teaching a paw target on a bowl. The dog never lies down on anything. They go to the end and top with their front feet off the contact, hind feet on. No way to miss the zone when they do that.

Looks like this:


----------



## Minky (Dec 6, 2016)

Hi, thanks so much for that, just the sort of response I was hoping for. Yep, I understand about two on/two off and I know you don't use the 'down' to teach agility contacts, I just thought the dog would get confused by using a flat target article (tile/mat) to initially teach both ie. 'does she want me to go down on the target, or put my paws/nose on the target?' I've only seen tiles/flat lids/mats etc used for teaching agility contacts, so using a bowl/cushion could create the point of difference I was looking for, puppy already knows how to put paws on balance cushion etc, so maybe I could use that. Lovely focused dog, great pic, thanks again.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

For what it's worth, at early stages of training we used a rubber horse bowl. I think it's 4 quarts and about 4" tall, used upside down obviously. Then we 'faded' it, by cutting the bottom out and using that flat disc as the paw target before removing it entirely. I think you'll be okay with almost anything pretty quickly - and certainly by the flat stage the dog'll know its feet go on it.


----------



## Minky (Dec 6, 2016)

Brilliant, thanks, that's great, I was wondering about the best way to fade out that type of contact. I just needed someone to help me 'think outside the square' (literally!).


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Use a small round target for contacts. We start with frisbees, move to yogurt lids, then clear plastic plexi glass, etc until it's clear and tiny and then it disappears. No relation at all to a mat so no confusion.

You could teach a nose target and I think Susan Garrett does that. I just worry about teaching the rear feet to target the contact itself, and the target on the ground becomes the treat delivery platform rather than something the dog should touch. I wouldn't teach a front foot contact or worry about what the front feet are doing, just worry about the rear.

ETA: I don't use a bowl for teaching rear foot targeting because I use that as a front foot target for heeling pivot work. You can get front vs rear on stimulus control, but I found it easier to use a board for the rear foot targeting. I had a ~3ft long board raised up a few inches, kind of like mini contact equipment but not sloped. Shape rear foot targeting and put it on cue. With a 3ft board you can get a little speed as they load on and hit the end and you can proof all of that the way you would with real contact equipment. It transfers over pretty well especially since you still use your round target for reward delivery.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

We use a front foot target with the bowl as the contact behavior. It's worked fine for us and everyone I've trained with - well, with Molly onward, which is where the switch happened in training method. With Kylie we (as in the classes/instructor) used the 'food on the contact on the ground' as teat delivery system and that worked fine for everyone, too. I honestly have never seen any confusion either way, or even difference in learning time, mistakes being made, or whatever. 

I'm sure there are dogs one works bette for than the other, as in anything, but it probably goes both ways (ie: there is no universal better). All that ultimately really matters is the position has a cue, is understood by the dog, and reward is delivered in that position. 

That said, the board and driving to it, starting flat and gradually adding incline, etc, were all basically the same.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

CptJack said:


> We use a front foot target with the bowl as the contact behavior. It's worked fine for us and everyone I've trained with. With Kylie we (as in the classes/instructor) used the 'food on the contact on the ground' as teat delivery system and that worked fine for everyone, too. I honestly have never seen any confusion either way, or even difference in learning time, mistakes being made, or whatever. I'm sure there are dogs one works bette for than the other, as in anything, but it probably goes both ways (ie: there is no universal better). All that ultimately matters is the position has a cue, is understood by the dog, and reward is delivered in that position.


ETA: Ignore post, I read your post wrong. lol


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I thought you were saying that you use a bowl as a back foot target, but you're using it for the front feet. That's just not how I would approach it since we use front feet on a bowl for a lot of heeling work. I also feel like teaching the back feet what to do is more clear for the dog. They can hit the target with their front feet and still swing off of the dogwalk with the back feet.

I'm sure it works, lots of stuff will work as long as your criteria is clear.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

No, I'm saying we use a front foot target on a bowl to teach contact. Ie: Yeah, contact on the ground in front of the contact, front feet hit it, reward and go. Fade the contact by making it flat, but always a front foot target. 

Kylie learned with basically feeding on a lid, Molly the other way - method switched between the two, I did set of classes all the way though with groups of dogs. It made absolutely no difference at all that I could see for any of the dogs in our group. The same kind of mistakes were there both ways (creeping up for some, swinging off until they learned to get their weight back for others) either way. 

Both work, but I've seen no real indication to think one works better than the other. Our club is split basically down the middle at this stage with method used to teach since the instructor shifted to a front foot target and it just... doesn't seem to matter. I'm sure it does for some dogs, but it's not something I've seen universally with one having more or even different short-comings than the other.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Yeah, read my other post. I thought you were saying that the bowl was a rear foot target that you faded.

Have you tried teaching it as a rear foot targeting behavior? That's how I've seen it the most, combined with feeding in position from the ground target.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Yes, you were posting again while I was. 

Honestly, I've never seen a dog have that confusion, and a lot of do pivot work with obedience - including Molly but only a little for her and TONS with others out doing hardcore obedience. Doesn't mean it isn't a thing. 

It's not like it's hard to keep the criteria clear, though, and honestly everyone's going to have a different approach just like they have a different dog. One True Way in agility is not a thing and the further into it I get the more convinced of that I am. Though, let's be real, contact behavior is just a trained position you add speed to. How the dog gets into that position matters way less than that the position is right and it is marked and rewarded appropriately.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

elrohwen said:


> Yeah, read my other post. I thought you were saying that the bowl was a rear foot target that you faded.
> 
> Have you tried teaching it as a rear foot targeting behavior? That's how I've seen it the most, combined with feeding in position from the ground target.


We're posting directly past each other. 

I have never seen or heard of (in real life) a rear foot contact used as a an agility contact training method, no. I have trained rear foot contacts with both my dogs, but never seen that used to train the behavior (at least not that started as a separate thing and was then transitioned to the contacts ). I have absolutely seen 'feed at the end when the dog's front feet are on the ground and back feet are on the contact' and that's how Kylie was trained. Molly DOES that (ie: just swings he butt up) if I put he on a contact end to start a thing, because clearly she understands the position, but she was trained with a front foot target that was faded.


----------



## Life With Atlas (Jan 6, 2008)

I have *no* idea if this will be helpful at all, but I just finished a puppy agility class with my 6 month old aussie. The only object we worked on with a contact was the teeter, but their idea was to teach a 'bottom' command. We started using raised beds (to simulate the table during other exercises) and from there luring their front feet off and mark/treating having their back feet on. Their suggestion was to use the 'bottom' command on things like stairs - or like another poster, I used an upside down tub. Then as we are doing sequences we purposely pause, with the command at the end of the teeter. I believe the goal is to have something like the picture that was posted - they know 'bottom' and will stop with their back feet on the object and wait for the next direction. Of course, Atlas is very super at following treats and it hasn't necessarily sunk in that it's something he needs to do on his own, but we're both just starting, so I'm ok with that. It's definitely something I can work on at home before we sign up for another session.

I'm of no help with the obedience side of things, but just had to pipe up with what I just finished learning!


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

CptJack said:


> We're posting directly past each other.
> 
> I have never seen or heard of (in real life) a rear foot contact used as a an agility contact training method, no. I have trained rear foot contacts with both my dogs, but never seen that used to train the behavior. I have absolutely seen 'feed at the end when the dog's front feet or off and back feet are on' and that's how Kylie was trained, but not using a rear foot target to train the contact. Molly DOES that (ie: just swings he butt up) if I put he on a contact end to start a thing, because clearly she understands the position, but she was trained with a front foot target that was faded.


Weird! Literally every trainer I've worked with who does 2o2o (so 3? plus one online, plus my friend who trains in VT) starts with teaching rear foot targeting, usually to some sort of board raised a little off the ground. Start with dog backing up or getting on it however, move to dog walking into the position, then transfer to baby dog walk then real contact equipment. Or one trainer shaped back feet in a box and front feet out of the box, but similar idea to the board. But it's always been about clicking and rewarding for what the back feet are doing, not the front.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

elrohwen said:


> Weird! Literally every trainer I've worked with who does 2o2o (so 3? plus one online, plus my friend who trains in VT) starts with teaching rear foot targeting, usually to some sort of board raised a little off the ground. Start with dog backing up or getting on it however, move to dog walking into the position, then transfer to baby dog walk then real contact equipment. Or one trainer shaped back feet in a box and front feet out of the box, but similar idea to the board. But it's always been about clicking and rewarding for what the back feet are doing, not the front.


When we were taught contacts we didn't do anything with the rear feet either. We did the nose targeting to a thing on the floor (yogurt lid, generally) and it's worked well for us.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

elrohwen said:


> Weird! Literally every trainer I've worked with who does 2o2o starts with teaching rear foot targeting, usually to some sort of board raised a little off the ground. Start with dog backing up or getting on it however, move to dog walking into the position, then transfer to baby dog walk then real contact equipment. Or one trainer shaped back feet in a box and front feet out of the box, but similar idea to the board. But it's always been about clicking and rewarding for what the back feet are doing, not the front.


Nope, nothing I've ever seen or heard in real life. Now, the board on the ground with the front foot target in front or food out in front? The progression is the same (though starts with 'put your feet on a bowl'). Food doesn't happen if their butt falls off, but in Molly's Method (ie: what the instructor had switched to) it was slamming front feet onto a bowl and with Kylie it was just running to eat the food off the lid that necessarily led to the dog being fed in position (ie: rush to the lid hit the right position, food appears on the lid) . I could theorize about potential reasons why, but it probably doesn't much matter since it would be guess work and since I've never seen an issue that needed worked around I mostly just shrug and chalk it up to lots of things working for most dogs and preference/'style'.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ireth0 said:


> When we were taught contacts we didn't do anything with the rear feet either. We did the nose targeting to a thing on the floor (yogurt lid, generally) and it's worked well for us.


Once the target is faded, is your criteria a sustained nose touch to the ground? Or do you fade the need for the nose touch? I know Susan Garrett trains it that way, but I haven't seen anybody use it in the classes I've done.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

elrohwen said:


> Once the target is faded, is your criteria a sustained nose touch to the ground? Or do you fade the need for the nose touch? I know Susan Garrett trains it that way, but I haven't seen anybody use it in the classes I've done.


Yes, nose touch to the ground, and we mix rewarding for that in position with releasing to continue the course as the reward for the nose touch.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

I've been taught 3 different possible ways to teach contacts to teach agility contacts: 1) lure/reward in place (simplest, more for teaching beginner handlers what's expected than for teaching the dog); 2) Nose target (teaches the dog to drive to the end of the obstacle instead of creeping slowly) and 3) rear foot targets (for speedy dogs, teaches them to be aware of what their back feet are doing so they don't just fly off the contact).

I had to use both #2 and #3. #2 built up her speed but didn't really teach her the position very well (and IMO it can be hard to do correctly unless you have a second person or a remote treat dispenser at your disposal). Her bottom contacts weren't solid until I taught rear-foot targeting. We struggled with getting decent contacts for 6+ months using the first 2 methods, and then within 2 weeks of introducing rear foot targets suddenly she choosing to stick the bottoms instead of only doing it when I was there to stop her with reward placement and/or body pressure. ( )

tl;dr - it really depends on the dog, which method will be the most successful for you. Using one doesn't stop you from using others, and you ultimately have to train the dog in front of you.


----------



## Minky (Dec 6, 2016)

Thanks everyone, lots of useful discussion going on here, with what works for different dogs etc, awesome!! Yep, I have trained this puppy to pivot on a tile as part of heel work training too. I am finding out how careful you have to be with a fast/high drive dog to 'get it right' as my new wee girl picks up on my training cues in the blink of an eye, which is exciting, but so easy to confuse if you're not clear. This is all really helpful as I have a 'blank canvas' dog as far as teaching agility contacts and now I can thoughtfully read through all this and work out a strategy. I had wondered about Susan Garrett's nose target training, and the concept of teaching the rear foot target for contacts is not something I am very familiar with either.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Are you talking about AKC / CKC style obedience ?

Personally I would avoid using any physical targets such as squares, mats, lids etc. Maybe in the very early stages only. Progress intermediately to environmental targets of everything imaginable, electrical wall outlets, door hinges, door knobs, garbage cans, tree trunks, whatever.

Then I'd teach the dog a "mark", which is a momentary look absolutely straight out to a variety of barriers, using the innermost stanchions of the bar and solid jumps as a visual reference. You'll probably have to move the jumps accordingly to create that variety, and also to gradually build distance. I use the cue "mark", whereby the dog will briefly avert his attention from my face out towards his destination then back to my face, then I give a second cue for the actual sendaway itself such as "go out" or "go to". I might suggest using "away" if you don't want to confuse a similar sounding "get out" as is often used in agility. The dog should turn 180 degrees and SIT (not down as you mentioned) upon command as well, and the cue for that must be given as the dog is still heading away from you rather than when he's reached the barrier and has already begun to turn around. 

This is merely a quick overview, there's a lot more to it of course and I've left out many steps here. It's a very complex and sometimes difficult exercise to teach. I mostly just wanted to mention about the sit though, in case you were unaware.


----------



## Minky (Dec 6, 2016)

Thanks for that, yes the sendaway can be a mission to teach! I'm actually in New Zealand so our competitive obedience may be somewhat different, I'm not familiar with AKC/CKC obedience. My current older dog has reached top level obedience (Test C), is that called the same at top level over there? We usually send the dog out to a square or triangle of 2,3 or 4 markers, the dog has to go down inside the square (never into a sit). There aren't many dogs in my area competing in both obedience and agility (especially at the higher levels) so it's hard to find enough experienced handlers to discuss training issues for both disciplines with.


----------

