# Hardest and easiest dog breeds to train



## Rinchan

This is out of curiosity.

I've always heard that some dog breeds are harder to train than others.

which are considered the hardest to train? The easiest? what makes a dog hard or easy to train?

My dog is a beardie, and while they are smart dogs, he was so stubborn about potty training. No matter how much we would correct him, he would still go inside the house. I feel like we tried everything. There were times when we thought he was trained, but then about a week later, he would have or try to have an accident right in front of us. He was probably almost a year old by the time we finally had him trained. However, he learned basic commands VERY quickly. He was giving paw probably less than two minutes of being introduced to the command.

I've heard that hounds can be hard to train.


----------



## GottaLuvMutts

Rinchan said:


> I've heard that hounds can be hard to train.


Where's Hulk when you need him? LOL
Since you're pretty new, I'll explain: A member here (Hulk) used to have a geriatric basset hound by the name of Brutus. If there was ever a dog who was completely untrainable, this was him. DF'ers shared many laughs at the expense of poor old Brutus, may he RIP. We miss the stories, buddy! Hope you're having fun tipping over garbage cans on the rainbow bridge! 

My vote for hardest to train would have to be hounds. They're bred to work pretty independently, so many just don't care what the handler wants. At least that has been my impression.

My vote for easiest to train would be a herding breed. Border collies generally take the cake in terms of brains, although some can be so smart that they resist training or find ways around it. Any dog that is bred to take direction from its handler (like herding breeds) will be easier to train. Add in a bit of food or toy motivation, and the only challenge is getting across what it is that you want. A lot of people are attracted to these breeds because of their biddability and intelligence. Unfortunately, many people fail to consider that all of that brain power means that these dogs NEED to be challenged on a daily basis.


----------



## Crantastic

Those "most intelligent breed" lists read more as "more easily trainable breed" lists to me. Those are the breeds you see most often in obedience and rally or doing police or service work. They've been bred to work closely with people, like GottaLuvMutts said, so they are more into pleasing their owners than other, perhaps equally as smart but not as easily trainable, breeds are. Here's the list I see referred to most frequently:

Border Collie
Poodle
German Shepherd
Golden Retriever
Doberman Pinscher
Shetland Sheepdog
Labrador Retriever
Papillon
Rottweiler
Australian Cattle Dog

Out of those, I've only owned a Papillon, but mine is definitely intelligent and biddable. I can teach her a new command in less than five repetitions. My Alaskan Klee Kai is smart, but he is not as interested in pleasing me. He works for the food, not the love. 

Here are the bottom dogs:

Shih Tzu
Basset Hound
Mastiff
Beagle
Pekingese
Bloodhound
Borzoi
Chow Chow
Bulldog
Basenji
Afghan Hound

Lots of hounds, haha. I don't think any of those breeds are stupid. They're just more independent. Look at the Basenji, for example... I've heard from many people that they're smart, but cat-like and not easy to train.


----------



## Marsh Muppet

It all kinda depends on the trainer's personality. That said, most people find training handler-oriented breeds to be easiest. That said, all breeds and individual dogs can present challenges. _That_ said, you need to stay within the parameters of the dog's temperament. I could train my Golden to do just about anything that doesn't require opposable thumbs, but he's never going to be useful as a guard dog. Not ever.

Herders and retrievers (including Poodles) would rank high on a trainability survey, with herders generally considered the more versatile type. If you have the personality to deal with protection breeds, they are super quick to learn and they are smart enough to learn a wide variety of tasks. With most of the "working" breeds, there is a longish puppyhood and often a difficult adolescence. The very same drives that make a breed useful to humans can give a trainer fits. They require some dedication on the trainer's part, but the results can be spectacular.

Hounds, sled dogs, and terriers are (in that order) widely considered toughest to train, but it's not 'cause they're stupid.


----------



## LazyGRanch713

Those "most intelligent breed" lists read more as "more easily trainable breed" lists to me. Those are the breeds you see most often in obedience and rally or doing police or service work. They've been bred to work closely with people, like GottaLuvMutts said, so they are more into pleasing their owners than other, perhaps equally as smart but not as easily trainable, breeds are. Here's the list I see referred to most frequently:

Border Collie
Poodle
German Shepherd
Golden Retriever
Doberman Pinscher
Shetland Sheepdog
Labrador Retriever
Papillon
Rottweiler
Australian Cattle Dog

*My GSD never got the memo *

Out of those, I've only owned a Papillon, but mine is definitely intelligent and biddable. I can teach her a new command in less than five repetitions. My Alaskan Klee Kai is smart, but he is not as interested in pleasing me. He works for the food, not the love. 

*Tag does it for the food, too. Not the love  But what we do usually becomes kind of another reinforcer...instead of a treat after every obstacle, the reward is the NEXT obstacle, and the jackpot is the A-frame. He LOVES the A-frame!*

Here are the bottom dogs:

Shih Tzu
Basset Hound
Mastiff
Beagle
Pekingese
Bloodhound
Borzoi
Chow Chow
Bulldog
Basenji
Afghan Hound

Lots of hounds, haha. I don't think any of those breeds are stupid. They're just more independent. Look at the Basenji, for example... I've heard from many people that they're smart, but cat-like and not easy to train.
*It's weird to me, because both of my cats come when they're called. The reward is usually something good in their food dish. If you can find the one thing that motivates a dog (or cat, or horse, or fish, etc) it's not so hard to teach them stuff. Dude is smart, but he wouldn't work if the reward was crumbled milkbones...(Tag would). Auz is smart, but he's not what I would consider biddable.
ETA: Tag seems like a genius to me, but put him up against an Alaskan and make the "intelligence" test pulling a sled. I wonder who would win.  Same if I put Auz up against an Afghan on a lure course...I got 10 bucks and a steak dinner the afghan would grind my "smart" GSD into the ground.*


----------



## SOKAIBA

You can add Catahoula's to the list as well. Mine is smart as a whip and learns fast..... when he wants to. He is more stubborn then my wife, but don't tell her that.

Kai


----------



## Inga

I agree that it depends greatly on the trainer. How a dog is trained depends greatly on it's own temperament/personality. Some dogs are the "what can I do for you next?" type. They are bred to work WITH people where others are bred to make their own decisions. Looking at what a dog is originally bred to do will give you a little clue to this. Intelligence in a dog can either work for or against an owner as well. I know many intelligent dogs that run all over their owners because the owner isn't smart enough to deal with a dog that is trying to out-think them constantly.


----------



## Shaina

As the above posters basically said...

Depends on what you are training the dog to do...
And how you, as the trainer, prefer to interact with and motivate the dog.


----------



## Cracker

I think most breeds that are considered 'difficult to train' are actually not that difficult..it is a failure of the human to understand the motivations of the breed. Not enough people understand premacking or how to harness an instinctive drive or their type of energy levels based on physical attributes.

Hounds are known to be difficult because they were not bred to be human centric for working, they are true pack hunters so a scent or another dog's invitation to run are often quite hard to overcome for training. But they do bond, infact many are pretty velcro with their humans WHEN NOT occupied with the scents of the world. LOL It takes WORK but it can be done.


----------



## melaka

My family had a Sheltie when I was a teen and she was so easy to train to do anything. I'm sure we didn't train her to her potential - just mostly trained tricks to entertain our friends.

Years later my parents got a Westie and she was much harder to train. I think it took them 6 months just to get her started on housebreaking and probably a full year before she was completely housebroken. She didn't have a reliable recall until around age 4.5 (also due to a lack of consistent training). Even now, at 6 years old, she is very friendly and listens most of the time, but she still has a very independent streak, which is kind of funny at times. (For example, most days she will come in from the yard when called, but sometimes she just stands there and acts like she can't even hear you - even from just 5 feet away. It's something about her body language when she does it that I really can't describe. Or, you ask her to jump up on one sofa, but she'll run across the room to the other sofa and jump onto that one instead.)

And my mutt has been pretty trainable so far. There were times when she was more motivated by things other than food, which made things tough sometimes, but she's coming around now as I'm learning to communicate better with her. (I have no idea what breeds she is, except for probably a little bit of Pug and likely some kind of Terrier along with a few other things.)


----------



## Elana55

One of the most successful AKC titling ppl in my dog club is all basenji's.. this is obedience, agility etc. 

My thinking on this is to read and train the dog.. and not so much worry about the breed. OTOH if you want a dog that is easy to catch on.. and continuous fun.. get a Poodle. They are a blast. 

Of course, I have a GSD who is the biggest clown on earth and the breed is considered smart and tough.. and there are GSD';s that are soft (shoud not be used for breeding but are). 

So.. here is what I suggest. Decide what you want a dog to be like for you and then go get a dog that best suits that need. Probably not a good idea to get a Bichon Frise if you want to go duck hunting.. and probably not a good idea to get a Chesapeak Bay Retriever if you want to have a lap dog.


----------



## Inga

Elana55 said:


> probably not a good idea to get a Chesapeak Bay Retriever if you want to have a lap dog.


But if you want a dog that has a similar temperament of a Chesapeak Bay Retriever and still want a Lap dog, get a Rottweiler.  

I have been told by so many people that Rottweilers are very very difficult to train because they are a "think for themselves" breed. Well, that might be true but because the breed works for me in other ways, I find them to be very easy to train. If I wanted to be a high scoring obedience person, I would have to be more careful as to which Rottie I chose. Some, are harder then others. My darling boy Carsten is a pig head but My old girl Inga was a work-aholic. She was drivey and a blast to work with. Each dog is an individual within a breed as well.

My sister who has never had a dog in her life and know NOTHING about training got an Australian shepherd mix and that dog for the most part trained itself to be an excellent family dog. Super smart and WANTS to learn.


----------



## NRB

Cracker said:


> I think most breeds that are considered 'difficult to train' are actually not that difficult..it is a failure of the human to understand the motivations of the breed. Not enough people understand premacking or how to harness an instinctive drive or their type of energy levels based on physical attributes.



This^^ in spades.
I think that for your average, takes one dog class in a lifetime owner who knows little about +R training that the more people focused breeds (herders, retievers, velcro working dogs like the Dobe's and etc) are far easier to work with and train than the more independant minded less people focused breeds like hounds and terriers. 

The "dumbest" dog I ever worked with was a Boykin Spaniel. She was from hunting stock and had a great nose. But I failed miserably to train her in basic obedience as the choke chain yank and yell method I was taught at the time just didn't get through to her. But now, 30 years later I realize what a total failure I WAS as a trainer, and how she was probally a very smart dog with a very stupid owner. 

My mentor, (+R trainer) insists that she will never ever have anything in her house BUT hounds. As the hounds are the easiest to work and live with. She works with all breeds in her dog trainign classes and in her private "problem dog" consultation business.

I would agree on the list posted about re: the more intelligent breeds. Notice that the top 10 is mostly herders, 2 retrievers and 1 working dog... I can't really comment on the to[ ten least intellegent....

I have worked with Golden Retrivers, Australian Shepherds, the one Boykin, one mutt and now a Standard Schnauzer. This is my first terrier and first working dog but is by far the smartest dog I've ever worked with. But then again, in all these years I've been learning more and more as well. So I've been getting better at reading dogs and dog training as well.

I would guess, irreguardless of the trainer, that the smartest dogs are the breeds that are out there excelling in Seeing Eye dogs, obedience, agility, police and search and rescue type work. So that would be Labs and other retrievers, Poodle, BC, GSD, Malnois, Dobies, and etc. Most difficult would be breeds bred to work independent of humans, ie hounds and terriers.


----------



## KBLover

Crantastic said:


> Those are the breeds you see most often in obedience and rally or doing police or service work. They've been bred to work closely with people, like GottaLuvMutts said, so they are more into pleasing their owners than other, perhaps equally as smart but not as easily trainable, breeds are.


In other words, it's a human-centric (i.e. the dog obeys me more quickly) list with no real regard or measurement for the dog's actual intelligences and the tasks/learning styles/training methods that best suit them?

If so - what's the point?

Especially considering any dog can be easily trained if you find (and use) his motivation and have a personality and teaching style that matches the dog's personality.


----------



## Crantastic

KBLover said:


> In other words, it's a human-centric (i.e. the dog obeys me more quickly) list with no real regard or measurement for the dog's actual intelligences and the tasks/learning styles/training methods that best suit them?
> 
> If so - what's the point?


Yes, and don't ask me -- I didn't make the list. 

I'm not sure I agree that _any_ dog can be _easily_ trained, but I do believe any dog can be trained. I know a girl who does rally with her Shiba Inu, and although she said it hasn't been _easy_, they've earned the RN title (and he's gotten his CGN -- Canine Good Neighbor, the Canadian equivalent of CGC -- as well). Some dogs will require much more patience than others and the proper motivation. I don't think this makes them "stupid" or even stubborn, really. But it does make them a bit more of a challenge for the average person to train.


----------



## KBLover

Crantastic said:


> Yes, and don't ask me -- I didn't make the list.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree that _any_ dog can be _easily_ trained, but I do believe any dog can be trained. I know a girl who does rally with her Shiba Inu, and although she said it hasn't been _easy_, they've earned the RN title (and he's gotten his CGN -- Canine Good Neighbor, the Canadian equivalent of CGC -- as well). Some dogs will require much more patience than others and the proper motivation. I don't think this makes them "stupid" or even stubborn, really. But it does make them a bit more of a challenge for the average person to train.



I wonder if the average person can train a dog well in general. Guess that depends on what "average" is. What is the average person with average ability with dogs? How would that be described and would even breeds that are highly trainable thrive (i.e. achieve more than the basics) with that sort of person?


----------



## Crantastic

I think of the "average" person as being someone who likes having a dog around, and wants the dog to know how to sit and walk nicely on a leash and eliminate outside and not bark all the time, but doesn't see the need to train behaviors aside from those. Basically, someone who wants a "good" dog but isn't interested in putting in a lot of effort. There's a reason labs and goldens are often suggested as "beginner" dogs, right? I know several people with those breeds who haven't done any real training besides maybe teaching their dogs to sit, but the dogs have picked up on how the owners want them to behave and it _looks_ like the owners have worked with them. I believe that if the people put in even a bit more effort, the dogs would learn whatever the people wanted them to know very quickly, whereas my AKK would walk all over them -- and he's not even one of the "difficult" breeds. 

But then once people start learning about training and putting in more effort, they're not really "average" dog owners anymore, are they?


----------



## LazyGRanch713

_
The "dumbest" dog I ever worked with was a Boykin Spaniel. She was from hunting stock and had a great nose. But I failed miserably to train her in basic obedience as the choke chain yank and yell method I was taught at the time just didn't get through to her. But now, 30 years later I realize what a total failure I WAS as a trainer, and how she was probally a very smart dog with a very stupid owner. _

This in spades as well. I find Tag, as operant as he is, a brilliant and fun little dog to work with. If yank and crank were the only method available, I've no doubt in my mind that he would be labeled stupid and defiant. (The only plus he may possibly have had with this type of handling would be he seems to have excellent bounce back). 
My idea of True Intelligence goes hand in hand with intuition; things you really can't "teach". Therapy dogs that visit hospitals and nursing homes and "just know" about kids and the elderly (like Xeph's Strauss) are what I consider the really amazing types. No doubt that some of this goes with experience and maturity on the dogs' part (for instance, Dude will turn himself inside out to get my grandma laughing), but in most cases he briefly greets and then ignores elderly people. I don't know if it's learned or intuition, but he knows about my grandma 



Crantastic said:


> Yes, and don't ask me -- I didn't make the list.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree that _any_ dog can be _easily_ trained, but I do believe any dog can be trained. I know a girl who does rally with her Shiba Inu, and although she said it hasn't been _easy_, they've earned the RN title (and he's gotten his CGN -- Canine Good Neighbor, the Canadian equivalent of CGC -- as well). Some dogs will require much more patience than others and the proper motivation. I don't think this makes them "stupid" or even stubborn, really. But it does make them a bit more of a challenge for the average person to train.


Well, the thing is--I've got a GSD, one of those amazing, intuitive, biddable, hard-working breeds. This individual dog thinks organized sports are stupid  How he works reminds me of how I clean. Getting going is the impossible part; finding the motivation to get started. (I can put off cleaning house for hours at a time). But, once I get going, I get into the "groove" and really make good time. When I start working on something new with Auz, getting him going is the hardest part. His heeling is a perfect example; at first it's sloppy and he's distracted and no reward is really worth doing it. But once he gets going, and we get into the groove of heeling, he's stunning to watch. Great position, excellent eye contact, beautiful form, etc. I call Auz stubborn a lot (among other things, lol) but he's really just difficult to motivate. Premack is Our Friend.



KBLover said:


> I wonder if the average person can train a dog well in general. Guess that depends on what "average" is. What is the average person with average ability with dogs? How would that be described and would even breeds that are highly trainable thrive (i.e. achieve more than the basics) with that sort of person?


In the Culture Clash (at least I think that's the book), she talks about how dog trainers vs. dog owners trained, and the people doing the training were told it was a study on how different breeds learn. The people who made training their passion gave out a lot more information--better timing, many more rewards, many more corrections. The dog owners were much slower with their timing and not as "free" at offering information via rewards and/or corrections. 
No idea how "average" is, but I found it kind of interesting because not many pet owners I know of ask about books about OC, CC, and the like, don't care about competition behaviors...they just want advice to make their dog pee outside/shut up when told. Most people that spend time on a dog forum want to know more than the average joe. (I don't really care about cars; so I don't frequent car forums. But I imagine there are plenty of people who make cars their passion and spend a lot of their time learning everything there is to know about cars)!


----------



## KBLover

Crantastic said:


> I think of the "average" person as being someone who likes having a dog around, and wants the dog to know how to sit and walk nicely on a leash and eliminate outside and not bark all the time, but doesn't see the need to train behaviors aside from those. Basically, someone who wants a "good" dog but isn't interested in putting in a lot of effort. There's a reason labs and goldens are often suggested as "beginner" dogs, right? I know several people with those breeds who haven't done any real training besides maybe teaching their dogs to sit, but the dogs have picked up on how the owners want them to behave and it _looks_ like the owners have worked with them. I believe that if the people put in even a bit more effort, the dogs would learn whatever the people wanted them to know very quickly, whereas my AKK would walk all over them -- and he's not even one of the "difficult" breeds.
> 
> But then once people start learning about training and putting in more effort, they're not really "average" dog owners anymore, are they?



Not by that definition, nope - they'll start rising up out of average. 

Plus - that's not really training a dog well. I mean, I know dogs do a lot in figuring us out when we DO train them well, but if they have to basically do ALL the work, then they aren't being trained.

And yep, those are often considered "beginner dogs" but I guess folks forget that these dogs still need stuff beyond sitting and peeing outside. I mean, those are energetic sporting dogs used to running and traveling long distances and the mental challenges of spotting and retrieving game, often following the handler's direction of need be. What's ironic is their intellect and biddability probably will have them "asking" their people "what are we gonna do today? huh? huh? huh?" and then the dog is "hyper and pushy" now.

Shoot, if all they want is some sits and peeing outside, probably any dog on that list could give them that, even if they have to bribe them for it (which still isn't training).

I think that average person doesn't want a dog, they want an animal that looks like a dog but doesn't make any sound and doesn't have a mind of their own.



LazyGRanch713 said:


> No idea how "average" is, but I found it kind of interesting because not many pet owners I know of ask about books about OC, CC, and the like, don't care about competition behaviors...they just want advice to make their dog pee outside/shut up when told. Most people that spend time on a dog forum want to know more than the average joe.


Yeah - like I said to Crantastic, an animal that looks like a dog but doesn't have a mind of their own and doesn't make any noise (so they should at least communicate via supersonic hearing so they are seen, petted when I feel like it, and not heard)

Never mind that the dog is probably barking because it's them trying to create their own stimulation because they aren't getting any. Mr/Mrs. Average probably never thought of that. They just think the dog is disobeying and therefore must be punished (or worse, given up/pts, and they continue look for this mythical dog-look-a-like animal).

I think that list isn't so much easiest for the average owner, but easiest for the average dog trainer/owner-with-a-trainer-mindset. I could see an average trainer achieving success with the 'easier' dogs that put up more with inconsistent signals, weaker (not outright horrible) timing, poorer (not outright clueless) execution, or just not having a clear idea of what the behavior should look like, so accept weaker/wrong versions of the correct behavior, but the dog figures it out fast and gives the right response almost every time and this issue rarely shows up.

Meanwhile, the 'harder' dogs are probably just more unorthodox in how you approach them (so basic out-of-the-book methods probably won't fly, at least not without modification) and the average trainer would struggle more.

The average dog owner would struggle with them all, especially with what was said in Culture Clash.


----------



## GottaLuvMutts

I'll add that I agree with a lot of what has been said above. People who think that their dog is untrainable often haven't taken the time to figure out what motivates their dog. 

My experience in training dogs (other than my own) is minimal, at best. She has spoiled me rotten, because as a herding x sporting cross, she is very biddable and finds everything motivating, from food to toys to the chance to interact with people. Honestly, I would probably struggle with the majority of dogs out there: soft dogs and dogs without food/toy motivation would be a difficult transition for me.


----------



## Pawzk9

Crantastic said:


> Those "most intelligent breed" lists read more as "more easily trainable breed" lists to me. Those are the breeds you see most often in obedience and rally or doing police or service work. They've been bred to work closely with people, like GottaLuvMutts said, so they are more into pleasing their owners than other, perhaps equally as smart but not as easily trainable, breeds are. Here's the list I see referred to most frequently:
> 
> Border Collie
> Poodle
> German Shepherd
> Golden Retriever
> Doberman Pinscher
> Shetland Sheepdog
> Labrador Retriever
> Papillon
> Rottweiler
> Australian Cattle Dog
> 
> Out of those, I've only owned a Papillon, but mine is definitely intelligent and biddable. I can teach her a new command in less than five repetitions. My Alaskan Klee Kai is smart, but he is not as interested in pleasing me. He works for the food, not the love.
> 
> Here are the bottom dogs:
> 
> Shih Tzu
> Basset Hound
> Mastiff
> Beagle
> Pekingese
> Bloodhound
> Borzoi
> Chow Chow
> Bulldog
> Basenji
> Afghan Hound
> 
> Lots of hounds, haha. I don't think any of those breeds are stupid. They're just more independent. Look at the Basenji, for example... I've heard from many people that they're smart, but cat-like and not easy to train.


I always thought it was interesting that ACD ranked so high on Coren's "smart dog list" and Australian Shepherds ranked so low. Thought was that they were so little known by AKC types when the book came out. Not saying ACDs are dumb (they definitely aren't) but they are not as high in biddability, which frequently is what humans are really looking for when they are looking for intelligence in other species. A lot of smart dogs get called dumb because their agenda isn't the same as ours. At the last Obedience Regional I went to, (when Aussies were pretty new to AKC) the lady in front of me in line at the welcome dinner noticed my Aussie t-shirt and went into a tirade about how disappointed she was in what she'd seen as far as brains in Aussies. Then she asked what class I was in. I told her open and she said "oh! I'm your judge tomorrow!" but she did give Phoebe a very high score.


----------



## wvasko

KBLover said:


> In other words, it's a human-centric (i.e. the dog obeys me more quickly) list with no real regard or measurement for the dog's actual intelligences and the tasks/learning styles/training methods that best suit them?
> 
> If so - what's the point?
> 
> Especially considering any dog can be easily trained if you find (and use) his motivation and have a personality and teaching style that matches the dog's personality.


90 breeds trained, some more than others and I have stated before it's not the breed it's the dog. There are just so many variables between dogs and trainers/owners and every breed will have an owner who claims his is the bestest/smartest ever. (I know "bestest" not a word) but it just sounded good in head. Probably the smartest dog that I was fortunate to train was a Polish Owczarek Nizinny named Hobart, He was an absolute dream. I know absolutely nothing about the breed just this particular dog in that breed.

Hobart is avatar, look at that face.


----------



## Zoi

Hey guys i'm just curious, how will you rank a Jack Russell?


----------



## LazyGRanch713

KBLover said:


> Yeah - like I said to Crantastic, an animal that looks like a dog but doesn't have a mind of their own and doesn't make any noise (so they should at least communicate via supersonic hearing so they are seen, petted when I feel like it, and not heard)
> 
> *Never mind that the dog is probably barking because it's them trying to create their own stimulation because they aren't getting any. Mr/Mrs. Average probably never thought of that. They just think the dog is disobeying and therefore must be punished (or worse, given up/pts, and they continue look for this mythical dog-look-a-like animal).*
> 
> I think that list isn't so much easiest for the average owner, but easiest for the average dog trainer/owner-with-a-trainer-mindset. I could see an average trainer achieving success with the 'easier' dogs that put up more with inconsistent signals, weaker (not outright horrible) timing, poorer (not outright clueless) execution, or just not having a clear idea of what the behavior should look like, so accept weaker/wrong versions of the correct behavior, but the dog figures it out fast and gives the right response almost every time and this issue rarely shows up.
> 
> Meanwhile, the 'harder' dogs are probably just more unorthodox in how you approach them (so basic out-of-the-book methods probably won't fly, at least not without modification) and the average trainer would struggle more.
> 
> The average dog owner would struggle with them all, especially with what was said in Culture Clash.


That, and it's always possible that the dog never gets much good attention and being told to shut up, be quiet, etc is still attention. Some dogs shut off when spoken to harshly, some consider it an invitation to be your bestest buddy, kwim?


----------



## Marsh Muppet

Zoi said:


> Hey guys i'm just curious, how will you rank a Jack Russell?


The more pertinent question is how your JRT ranks you in the trainability department. Most that I've seen have had far more success training their humans than the other way around.

JRTs--and most terriers--are above average smart and on the tough side to train. The latter is the reason their intelligence is routinely underestimated. Terriers tend to be _highly_ trainable, but you need to develop the proper rapport if you hope to get anywhere with them. They are not Golden Retrievers, and won't necessarily work for a kindly smile from Master. Won't necessarily admit that any human holds the title of "Master".

The same techniques that work for any dog will work on terriers, but terriers "go to eleven". You need to start off correctly, be more consistent, and head off problems before they occur. That requires strategy. Tough love is okay, but don't try to bully them. You shouldn't bully any dog, but a good terrier is born missing the part of his brain that would allow him to back down from a fight. Choose your battles wisely; win the battles you choose.


----------



## GypsyJazmine

LGD breeds are independent thinkers & not easy to train because of this...With that said I keep 4 Great Pyrs & an AkbashxMaremma & haven't found them THAT difficult to train...Then again these are the only kinds of dogs that I've ever had so maybe I would find another breed easier.


----------



## Sighthounds4me

Ya know, the thing about hounds...it really depends on a lot of things. Obviously, I have sighthounds. I do not _need_ them well-trained because typically, these breeds are very well-mannered dogs. They are just very polite, lazy dogs (generally speaking), who need little training.

Yes, they are often tough to train. But I know of plenty of Greyhounds and Borzoi with advanced obedience, agility, and rally titles. the thing to remember is a sense of humor. I have had plenty of nights in training classes where I have had to roll my eyes, chuckle, praise the dog for breathing, and sit on the sidelines and watch. They certainly DO NOT learn the same way as many other breeds. BUT, as already stated, they ARE NOT unintelligent breeds! There are, however, less intelligent individuals. Xeph and Keechak have each met Cooper! LOL


----------



## KBLover

LazyGRanch713 said:


> That, and it's always possible that the dog never gets much good attention and being told to shut up, be quiet, etc is still attention. Some dogs shut off when spoken to harshly, some consider it an invitation to be your bestest buddy, kwim?



Yep, it's like "OH YOU TALKED TO ME OH GOOD NOW MAYBE WE'LL DO SOMETHING!" 

Interesting how aversive becomes pos. reinforcement in the right situation, isn't it?


----------



## LazyGRanch713

KBLover said:


> Yep, it's like "OH YOU TALKED TO ME OH GOOD NOW MAYBE WE'LL DO SOMETHING!"
> 
> *Interesting how aversive becomes pos. reinforcement in the right situation, isn't it*?


It is, and IMO it all goes back to the discussion that asks "what is an aversive"? Food isn't aversive to most people unless they have the flu...the same way smacking Auz across the butt with a toy is reinforcing to him (it starts a great game), but it's aversive to Tag ("my mom STRUCK me....WTF??!") A Buster Cube is highly rewarding to Tag, but (IMO) somewhat aversive to Dude because he never figured out how to make it work. (He knows the food is there, and it frustrates him.) My job is usually very reinforcing, but some days its highly aversive :laugh:



GypsyJazmine said:


> LGD breeds are independent thinkers & not easy to train because of this...With that said I keep 4 Great Pyrs & an AkbashxMaremma & haven't found them THAT difficult to train...Then again these are the only kinds of dogs that I've ever had so maybe I would find another breed easier.


I've found my paps to be *much more* biddable than my GSD, and GSD's are "#3" in intelligence while paps are "#8". 
If I use Premack on the Premack King (aka the GSD), he "becomes" much more biddable. 
If there's even a slight chance of a hint that I might decide to break out some food, Tag becomes Biddability Boy.


----------



## Pawzk9

LazyGRanch713 said:


> It is, and IMO it all goes back to the discussion that asks "what is an aversive"? Food isn't aversive to most people unless they have the flu...the same way smacking Auz across the butt with a toy is reinforcing to him (it starts a great game), but it's aversive to Tag ("my mom STRUCK me....WTF??!") A Buster Cube is highly rewarding to Tag, but (IMO) somewhat aversive to Dude because he never figured out how to make it work. (He knows the food is there, and it frustrates him.) My job is usually very reinforcing, but some days its highly aversive :laugh:
> 
> 
> I've found my paps to be *much more* biddable than my GSD, and GSD's are "#3" in intelligence while paps are "#8".
> If I use Premack on the Premack King (aka the GSD), he "becomes" much more biddable.
> If there's even a slight chance of a hint that I might decide to break out some food, Tag becomes Biddability Boy.


Canned spinach is aversive to me! (have never quite gotten over being forced to eat it at summer camp) It gets pretty easy when you realize that the dog choses what is reinforcing and what is aversive. What we think should be fun or not fun only matters if we ask the dog.


----------



## LiveLaughDogs

The easiest to train breeds to me have to be,
Border Collies, 
Labrador Retrievers,
Doberman Pischers,
Belgian Sheepdogs,
Australian Cattle dogs,
etc...
The hardest to train dogs on my list are,
shih Tzus
Dalmatians
Siberian huskies (since they're so stubborn, but are still very intelligent)
basset hounds
chow chows
Now what commands you’re trying to teach a type of dog can also determine the difficulty level you will have with that breed on that particular task. Some breeds are better than others at learning certain tricks at faster rates while learning other slower.


----------



## Laurelin

Train in what is my question.

It depends on breed some, but also the individual. For example, all the dogs I've ever had are on the 'top 10' list. I just like that style of dogs- very in tune with their owner and keyed in all the time. I've had a BC/collie mix, a labrador, a GSD/Golden, Shelties, and papillons for what it's worth.

The easiest dog I find to train is by far Summer, my oldest papillon. She is very into people, very food motivated (toy drive is nonexistent). She is not overly intelligent though. She's not dumb, but not a big independent thinker. Summer is just constantly asking 'okay what are we going to do? Is this what you want? Is this?" And she has a lot of focus too. She can learn a behavior in just a repetition or two and links behaviors together very easily. Summer will work for anything, you don't need a reward for her. She'll just do it because she really lives to please. Mia is a much harder dog to train in so many ways, easier in others. Mia is also by far the smartest dog I've owned. She is higher drive so motivating her is easier. She does everything faster and with more gusto than Summer. On the flip side, she gets over the top a LOT and I have to calm her down. She is easily frustrated if I'm not moving fast enough and easily distracted if something else shiny catches her eye. But when she's on, she is ON. She connects dots faster together and is a lot more able to independently come up with things on her own. She's a good combination of in tune but yet independent and is just a fun dog for me to handle. Then Bernard is half husky, I swear. He just doesn't give a flip what you're telling him to do. Could care less. You tell him something and he sits there, works through it, decides he doesn't want to, and then flips you off and does what he wants. But in general out of the 7 papillons I've had, 6 have been very people oriented and easy to work with. 

I DO think breed plays a part but it's not the end all be all. Not all BCs are whizzes, not all hounds are untrainable. My last sheltie was dumber than a box of rocks. Sweet, but missing something in his head. My other two shelties were the total opposites and were very bright and clever dogs. But I have a really hard time working with hounds. (I found this out after being paired with beagle after beagle when I worked in rescue and after living with my friends' beagle a long while). Certain human personality types mesh with certain types of dogs I find. I could never own a husky or a hound. Just not my type of dog and I just don't 'get' them. I will most likely only ever own papillons and herding type dogs.

A lot will be figuring out what you like. Mia would drive most people up the wall trying to do anything with her. I love it though and it's a nice balance of challenging (she's not a dog to robotically obey like Summer does) and still driven to work with you.



LazyGRanch713 said:


> I've found my paps to be *much more* biddable than my GSD, and GSD's are "#3" in intelligence while paps are "#8".
> If I use Premack on the Premack King (aka the GSD), he "becomes" much more biddable.
> If there's even a slight chance of a hint that I might decide to break out some food, Tag becomes Biddability Boy.


The paps overall (sans Nard) are the most biddable dogs I've owned and all I've owned are sporters and herders. Much much much more biddable than the shelties especially. I don't know exactly why that is. Most spaniels have a reputation for being a bit doofy and unintelligent. Every time someone's heard of papillons though before I get asked "Aren't those dogs really smart?" I'm not sure how that gets around either. But yes, I find them to be just a joy to work with. They're almost too easy in some ways. I feel like I'm cheating LOL.


----------



## LazyGRanch713

Laurelin said:


> The paps overall (sans Nard) are the most biddable dogs I've owned and all I've owned are sporters and herders. Much much much more biddable than the shelties especially. I don't know exactly why that is. Most spaniels have a reputation for being a bit doofy and unintelligent. Every time someone's heard of papillons though before I get asked "Aren't those dogs really smart?" I'm not sure how that gets around either. But yes, I find them to be just a joy to work with. They're almost too easy in some ways. I feel like I'm cheating LOL.


If I were to compare my papillons to the GSD, the GSD would be voted dumber than a box of rocks. Like you're sheltie, there's something "missing" there that doesn't lend him to retaining things he learned 2 minutes ago. It's weird.
However, if I were to put all 3 of my dogs on sheep, I can probably guess who would be the "smart" one. 
Likewise, if I were to put my 3 up against a sighthound in the coursing department, I can probably guess who would be the "smart" one.
When it comes to Tag, he's the reason I'm leaning toward competition. If I didn't, it would feel like I was completely wasting his talent.


----------



## Pawzk9

LazyGRanch713 said:


> If I were to compare my papillons to the GSD, the GSD would be voted dumber than a box of rocks. Like you're sheltie, there's something "missing" there that doesn't lend him to retaining things he learned 2 minutes ago. It's weird.
> However, if I were to put all 3 of my dogs on sheep, I can probably guess who would be the "smart" one.
> Likewise, if I were to put my 3 up against a sighthound in the coursing department, I can probably guess who would be the "smart" one.
> When it comes to Tag, he's the reason I'm leaning toward competition. If I didn't, it would feel like I was completely wasting his talent.


I think the thing is, we humans tend to classify animal intelligence based on what is most useful to us, not what is most useful for them. For instance, is there a greater miracle in the animal kingdom than the honey bee? I think if we really want to compare intelligence we have to look at what animals do what is most useful for them.


----------



## Silvicen

GypsyJazmine said:


> LGD breeds are independent thinkers & not easy to train because of this...With that said I keep 4 Great Pyrs & an AkbashxMaremma & haven't found them THAT difficult to train...Then again these are the only kinds of dogs that I've ever had so maybe I would find another breed easier.


Ahhh I love LGD's, gotta have at least one. I have an ASD/Rott and an ASD/BC. The BC mix is much more responsive, I can call her off chasing rabbits, and has a higher work drive but if she thinks there is a threat to mom, well then the ASD side really comes out and the only thing to do is eliminate/remove the threat. There is not really any reasoning with her when she is in guardian display mode. The Rottie mix is highly food motivated but when I call her I have a 50/50 chance that she will come. She will always acknowledge that I am calling her but its almost as if she says "Wait a minute I have to finish checking the perimeter then I will be right there." 

I think the hardest dogs I have ever had to train were pugs. I used to wonder what Spanky (a pug) was thinking or if he was thinking. He never had any sort of recall till the day he died. 

When my SO got his first mtn cur the breeder gave him the dog and offered to sell him a club. and no he never beat the dog although sometimes he was tempted. 

There has been alot of good points in this thread. Just remember you have to be smarter than the dog to train them and a smart dog knows when to obey but a smarter dog knows when to disobey.


----------



## frostywolf

Zoi said:


> Hey guys i'm just curious, how will you rank a Jack Russell?


Personally, I've found JRTs to be extremely trainable. But not everyone shares that opinion. I agree with what others have posted, in that ease of training correlates to the handler's understanding of a particular dog/breed's main motivation.

When I adopted my JRT, I took him to a group class. He is extremely intelligent, and picked up free-shaping very, very quickly. He took very few repetitions to understand what I wanted from him. But in the group class, I constantly had people saying things like, "good luck" "I heard they are hard to train" etc. I think one thing that people find tough with JRTs is that they are very independent. When learning, my boy enjoys that, and he will work like mad. But once he understands the behavior I want, if I repeat it too much, he will take off, like "I know this, why should I do it again?" So my challenge is to constantly keep him on his toes. And this holds true for lots of dogs. When refreshing/proofing known behaviors, I change things up constantly, otherwise I'll lose him for that session.


----------



## K8IE

Gosh, this is a really hard question. I have dealt with a lot of dogs besides my own in my pet sitting jobs, as well as friends wanting me to come over to help them out with their dogs. I honestly don't think I could generalize much, because I have seen several dogs that are stereotyped as being harder to train be so well behaved and trained that it blows me away. I really think it all comes down to a dog being with the right owner, and said owner truly developing a relationship with their dog and finding what motivates them and how to "speak" to them, in a way. I am presently raising my first Bulldog pup and it is true what they say about them being stubborn and having "a mind of their own", lol. My Boxers have always been really easy to train, but I have met some that are not. LIke I said though, SO hard to generalize, because there are so many factors to take into account.


----------



## Jacksons Mom

I do believe that for the MOST part, it's the human behind the dog and not the dog to be blamed. But not in ALL cases of course. There's always exceptions to every "rule".

Jackson is a 2 year old terrier who has been so easy to train from the beginning. He knows probably close to 50 tricks right now, plus other commands and words, and also listens to other people (as long as they have food). He's willing, he's food motivated, he loves me (but, I admit, he's usually doing the tricks for the food, LOL). But we do have a tight bond and he trusts me and is willing to "listen" to me and hear what I have to "say"... if that makes sense. I just love watching him trying to figure something out. If I put a shoe down in front of him, for example, he will try everything to see what it is that I want him to do. However, if I put a shoe out in front of my dads Dachshund mix, Buddy, he will typically stare at me and give me a "wtf, I'm not touching that, just give me the treat" look. Buddy is the hardest dog I've found to motivate, but it's in him. You've just gotta be SUPER excited and get him pumped up, and use a REALLY good treat. 

My dads JRT mix is often called 'stupid' because she barks constantly, she is always going potty in the house, and is typically an all around PITA. I see a ton of potential in her, however, and I think had she been trained, she could have been an amazing dog, and still could be. I did a few agility stuff with her in the backyard by using things around us like logs and sticks, and picnic tables, and she was very willing and able. So in her case, it's just a matter of nobody ever TEACHING her.

I would definitely say that breeds that were bred to work closer to people are "smarter" in general. I really like that Jackson is also willing to think for himself. And while Jackson is probably the smartest dog I've ever met (including dogs I dogsit and grew up with), he's still not ever going to be at "Border Collie level". I've also put the time and energy into Jackson that alot of people don't put into their dogs. He never ever liked tennis balls or frisbees, or anything. But because I taught him that they were good and positive things -- he now dives into swimming pools fetching his favorite toys, he will be motivated and focused on a frisbee, and he loves to chase tennis balls. Had I not ever TAUGHT him that these things are fun, he's not the kind of dog who naturally would have enjoyed those things, had I not been behind him teaching him.



K8IE said:


> Gosh, this is a really hard question. I have dealt with a lot of dogs besides my own in my pet sitting jobs, as well as friends wanting me to come over to help them out with their dogs. I honestly don't think I could generalize much, because I have seen several dogs that are stereotyped as being harder to train be so well behaved and trained that it blows me away. I really think it all comes down to a dog being with the right owner, and said owner truly developing a relationship with their dog and finding what motivates them and how to "speak" to them, in a way. I am presently raising my first Bulldog pup and it is true what they say about them being stubborn and having "a mind of their own", lol. My Boxers have always been really easy to train, but I have met some that are not. LIke I said though, SO hard to generalize, because there are so many factors to take into account.


^^ Yes, exactly this. I think that a true bond and relationship has to be formed with your dog in order to get a dog to do amazing things, or whatever. It's not something that you can just expect to happen (in most cases).


----------



## LazyGRanch713

Pawzk9 said:


> I think the thing is, we humans tend to classify animal intelligence based on what is most useful to us, not what is most useful for them. For instance, is there a greater miracle in the animal kingdom than the honey bee? I think if we really want to compare intelligence we have to look at what animals do what is most useful for them.


Right. Also, it would be interesting to know exactly what methods were used when describing what breeds are the "most trainable". A field bred lab with an extremely high pain tolerance and good bounce back would probably respond better to "sit...::op::: no, SIT" training than a thin-skinned sighthound. Likewise, I've found my cats to be easily taught and a lot of people will say you can't teach cats anything. 
A dog doing whatever it's owner or handler says is one thing, but a dog with hard-wired genetics (LGD's, for instance) that instinctively know what to do is pretty amazing, if you ask me.


----------



## Tankstar

I personally think it has alot to do with the trainer as opposed to the breed (breed as a whole. offcourse there is always a exception)

I grew up with collies and toy poodles. Easy to train dogs, pretty much trained their selves. As my family was what i would call you average owner. We were happy with potty trained dogs, dogs who came when called, and could do the very basics (sit, stay, lay down, come)

I still have a collie. but now I have one of those "stubborn breeds" as well, a beagle. Now he is only going on 5 months old. but so far he is very smart, and willing to learn. I have high hopes for him and I in rally and agility, and hope it all works out. but So far so good. Food motivates him like no other. But toys can make him just as happy. he exceled through puppy school. Even beating the golden retrievers in class (3 of them). Our instructor (who does rally, agility, CGN ect with her dogs) was/is very impressed with how he is turning out.

Take golden retrievers and labs for example. "very easy to train" breeds. Yet the average owners lab or golden i normally find to be very "rude", as in pushy in your face dogs normally. Very happy and sweet but over the top happy and sweet, knowing no boundries in your face. Most I meet will not think about jumping right on you, or running off ignoring their owner to meet another dog or human. My point is it would be easy to train them to not jump directly on people, and easy to train them to come when called. Yet the average owner doesnt do either, as they think this is a train itself sorta breed. since these breeds have been drilled in to peoples heads as the perfect dog breeds to choose.


----------



## jiml

My vote for hardest to train would have to be hounds.>>>>

They are great as long as you have food on you. And their nose always knows if its there.


----------



## KBLover

Pawzk9 said:


> I think the thing is, we humans tend to classify animal intelligence based on what is most useful to us, not what is most useful for them.


Exactly, which is why I think those lists are worthless.

Human-centric lists don't tell me if the DOG is more or less intelligent or in what ways.

That would be a list that would seem more useful (at least to me), because then I can tailor my teaching (and/or rewarding) to better tap into what the dog's natural aptitude is and where I can more likely expect struggles.

Of course, you can do that watching your own dog (for example, I know things I pretty much expect Wally to struggle and progress slowly, while anything regard positioning relative to something else or using his paws, tends to be picked up more easily).


----------



## RubyFeuer

I vote hardest to train are northern breeds because of their independence and Labs and other of those type at the easiest to train because they depend on you more.


----------

