# Negative Markers



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

I was clicker training my young dog when he was young (about 6 months old). I only clicked and rewarded when I got what I wanted. I gave him NO feedback for the incorrect response. I only rewarded the right response. 

It drove him crazy. What is said below is almost to the word what she told me. It was my dog to a "T." I started to add "No" as a negative marker when he did it wrong (coupled with no click/reward). 

His progress went immediately from escalating frantic concern ad avoidance behavior (sniffing the ground) to confidence and a look of "Ah HA! Got it!"

".._A strange thing started to happen. When I did not click and feed her action, she decided it was wrong. Even though I had never told her that – she decided it was wrong and internally crumpled. She would shut-down, not want to train any more, nor would she want to engage with me. For Hilda – not being told that she had made an error was incredibly stressful because she had to keep guessing what I wanted. I wasn’t laying out any clear parameters for her of my expectations. Instead, I kept making her guess, and only rewarding her when she was right._ ..

http://naughtydogge.com/blog/stress-relief-through-clear-communication-dog-training


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 15, 2017)

Oh yeah.....this is something I figured out before I found there was a technical term for it- negative marker. I use the word "nope". Beau is pretty funny about this. If I'm not expressing what I want in a way he understands he'll offer behaviors trying to get it right. He's a sport and tries really hard. There sometimes comes that point though where he gets really frustrated with me......instead of going into avoidance or crumbling he actually gets an attitude about it. I love that about him though. Even when he cops an attitude he doesn't give up. That dog tries his royal butt off. It's like he's saying " dammit, I'm trying as hard as I can here, be more clear damn you!". 
Haven't tested it with Beau, but I do think think the negative marker adds a bit of needed communication and I have the feeling if it wasnt there he might just decide I'm too stupid to listen to and not try as hard as he does now! Those seemingly little things sure do go a long way.


----------



## LeoRose (Aug 20, 2015)

Boils down to "everyone is an individual". Some people use non-reward markers. Some people don't. Some dogs do well with them. Some dogs don't. If they work for you and your dog, then everything's fine and dandy. Another dog might simply shut down and quit trying when told they were "wrong".


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

LeoRose said:


> Boils down to "everyone is an individual". Some people use non-reward markers. Some people don't. Some dogs do well with them. Some dogs don't. If they work for you and your dog, then everything's fine and dandy. Another dog might simply shut down and quit trying when told they were "wrong".


Well, you don't exactly yell it or say it meanly.. it is more of a conversational, "Nope, that's not it buddy" with no reward.

Of course all those extra words just make it grey. A simply said, "no" or "nope" should not shut a dog down....
If it does, then yes or Click won't work either.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

LeoRose said:


> Boils down to "everyone is an individual". Some people use non-reward markers. Some people don't. Some dogs do well with them. Some dogs don't. If they work for you and your dog, then everything's fine and dandy. Another dog might simply shut down and quit trying when told they were "wrong".


Yep.

I use them with some of my dogs, sometimes. I don't use them ever or at all with others. Depends on a whole lot of things but bottom line is 'if the dog finds them useful, yes, if the dog finds them distressing, no.'


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Well, you don't exactly yell it or say it meanly.. it is more of a conversational, "Nope, that's not it buddy" with no reward.
> 
> Of course all those extra words just make it grey. A simply said, "no" or "nope" should not shut a dog down....
> If it does, then yes or Click won't work either.



Um, no.

Dogs have personalities. Some have the drive for the reward to work through. Some do not and, in fact, are so sensitive on top of that that a 'nope' or 'oops' will shut them down. I have one of those. She now has enough drive for agility that she will easily accept a 'nope' and try again, but at early stages when she lacked confidence in what was going on *and* had no reward history built into the game so much as a lower value reward (still reward but like a cheerio instead of piece of chicken) for her making an effort meant she stood there with her ears down/sideways, tail tucked and head down and did NOTHING. 

NOT ALL DOGS ARE WORKING GSDS. We keep telling you this. You keep failing to grasp it. A confident, fairly driven, secure dog should be able to take 'not that' without melting. Not all dogs, not even all sports dogs, are confident, driven, or secure. FFS.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Oh and PS. The dog I'm talking about? Is the one with *19 titles* and a few awards, including a top 10 in her height class, nationally, so let me pre-empt that 'not suitable for sports' thing right off the bat.


----------



## Lillith (Feb 16, 2016)

My dog is one of those dogs who would quickly lose enthusiasm for training if I used a negative marker. If my dog is becoming frantic and exhibiting avoidance behaviors when I am trying to teach him a behavior, I am not breaking it down enough for him. If he's not "getting it" one way, then I take a step or two back and break the behavior down into smaller and smaller pieces.

So yes, he is one of those dogs who will become a puddle if he thinks he has disappointed me. He does respond very well to a positive marker such as "yes" and a reward, so I think your above statement is incorrect. Each dog is an individual, and what works for one may or may not work for another.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Lillith said:


> If my dog is becoming frantic and exhibiting avoidance behaviors when I am trying to teach him a behavior, I am not breaking it down enough for him. If he's not "getting it" one way, then I take a step or two back and break the behavior down into smaller and smaller pieces.


Yeah, also this though this is Molly are Kiran (ie: the border things) rather than Kylie. I have had to (gently) interrupt some frantic behavior by both. Sit the dog down (with a command) reward them for that, get a look at me and hen start over - with smaller steps. That is a sort of 'okay you're wrong' signal but mostly the frantic and frustrated are "you're wrong" signals from them to me! Ie: I'm doing it wrong and need to fix myself.

That said, both are fine with NRMs used sparingly - just not in the early stages of training and it has to be cleared, timed well and used for things the dog largely already knows.


----------



## Moonstream (Apr 3, 2016)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Well, you don't exactly yell it or say it meanly.. it is more of a conversational, "Nope, that's not it buddy" with no reward.
> 
> Of course all those extra words just make it grey. A simply said, "no" or "nope" should not shut a dog down....
> If it does, then yes or Click won't work either.


I'm not really sure about the logic behind this statement? A reward marker isn't distressing. To many dogs, a non-reward marker is distressing- even to the ones still able to work through that stress. It might not cause them so much stress that they stop trying, but that doesn't mean that it's not distressing to them. 

From what I've seen of your activity on this forum, you have worked with one kind of dog, for one purpose. Exclusively. You seem to have a fair amount of experience in that one area, and have apparently titled dogs in your sport. That doesn't change the fact that you have only worked with one kind of dog. You are then giving people (people without the knowledge to understand the context your advice is coming from) advice about dogs that share few traits with the dogs you have experience with. That doesn't make for good advice.

You often say things alluding to any dog with any kind of fear of intense softness issue being broken/off/worthless. The problem is, those dogs exist. People with those dogs are not going to get rid of them and move on to the next one like they would if they were training the dog for sport. In fact, I've actually seen most people be remarkably understanding towards those dogs, even when they end up with them without realizing what they were getting in to.

I agree completely with what CptJack said. Not all dogs meet the IPO definition of what a stable dog is. Not all dogs have to meet that, because -shocker- there are homes out there that are perfectly happy to live with those dogs!

*It does not do any good to continuously berate and, especially, discount dogs that don't meet your standards of temperament. It doesn't help people who are asking the questions about those dogs, it doesn't help the people reading those threads to expand their own knowledge, and, especially, it doesn't help YOU expand your knowledge.*

ETA: When I say you've worked with one kind of dog, I want to clarify that I don't mean every working line GSD you've had has had the same cookie cutter personality. I'm sure you've experienced variety in temperament. But it sounds like that variety is pretty exclusive to working line GSD, some Mals, some Dutchies, and maybe a handful of other individuals from different breeds that did IPO. What you don't seem to have any experience handling are "normal" dogs. Dogs not bred and raised to listen to a handler. Dogs from a variety of breed backgrounds. Dogs from rescues and shelters. Dogs owned by normal people, in normal situations.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Moonstream said:


> People with those dogs are not going to get rid of them and move on to the next one like they would if they were training the dog for sport.


One correction here: I know very few non-IPO sport homes that do this. I effectively never see it in agility or disc, anyway. Most work with the dog they get, and in many cases they're not purpose bred sports dogs. Most are successful. A few aren't (very few), and never trial, but they still stay very loved pets who have good lives. 

Otherwise 200% agreement.


----------



## Moonstream (Apr 3, 2016)

CptJack said:


> One correction here: I know very few non-IPO sport homes that do this. I effectively never see it in agility or disc, anyway. Most work with the dog they get, and in many cases they're not purpose bred sports dogs. Most are successful. A few aren't (very few), and never trial, but they still stay very loved pets who have good lives.
> 
> Otherwise 200% agreement.


I should have clarified I mostly meant "bite sport". I am relatively new to the sport world (still in the training stage with my own dogs, not too many trials attended in person, and only really connected via the internet at this point). I will say- I have pretty much never seen people rehoming already owned dogs that they got for non bite sports rehoming dogs for reasons to do with drive. But I also think the majority of those people are getting a dog as a pet first, and a sport dog second.

I do see "this dog doesn't have the drive I want" posts almost daily on the bite work/working shepherd forums I am plugged into via facebook. Which, I should add, I have no inherent problem with. I understand that those dogs were often not taken on primarily as a pet. The dogs were bought as something else first (whether for work, as an experience builder, or for breeding), and then *also* as a companion/pet.

...BUT...

(and this is more for clarification for others and especially the OP and not necessarily directly in response to your comment, CptJack) 

99.99% of dog owners DO NOT live that way. "This dog doesn't take pressure/correction exactly the way I want it to" is NOT a mark against the dog when the dog is not primarily a working dog. And most dogs are not working dogs. To PM3GSD4IPO I am very curious what your response is to that critique? I absolutely 100% do not mean that in a confrontational way, I am legitimately curious. It's hard to get tone across in text online, and I do worry that that may sound mocking/disrespectful/instigative which is not my intention.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> I only clicked and rewarded when I got what I wanted. I gave him NO feedback for the incorrect response.


 There are many ways of providing feedback, aside from clicking and NRMs. ie: focal point, subtle shift in posture, facial expressions etc.

Training is never as simple as black and white, because grey areas will always exist. They're virtually unavoidable. You just have to know which strings to pull when you're amid the grey.






> http://naughtydogge.com/blog/stress-...n-dog-training


 I dunno. My eyes tend to glaze over whenever people play the *punishment will save your dog's life* card.



... just my two bucks worth.


----------



## LeoRose (Aug 20, 2015)

petpeeve said:


> I dunno. My eyes tend to glaze over whenever people play the *punishment will save your dog's life* card.


You and me both.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Soro took no-reward markers pretty well. He was food motivated enough (and I was not as good of a trainer so I think his tolerance for MY frustration was higher) that he was always ready to jump back into the game for more. Brae, for how physically unshakable he is, is VERY sensitive to my moods and tones. Just me, not anyone else. A no-reward marker would ruin the training session. Like, he'd just lie on the ground and look at me or he would perform with a fraction of the enthusiasm. Considering I am successfully working on 70+ behaviors, he's taken over 7 group classes, and training in general is just an absolute joy across many different activities and locations.... I think he's doing just fine without no-reward markers.

Incidentally, both dogs ROCK at free shaping. I can get either of them to do pretty complex behaviors like go across a room and stand in a box, all while I'm sitting on the other side of the room in a chair. Free shaping is all about rewarding increments towards the ultimate goal. There is a LOT of silence and patience when a dog is 'wrong'. It is up to the trainer to set criteria so that a dog does not get too frustrated or give up. 

I think another side to this picture is, it takes training for a dog to be willing to work through frustrations... no-reward markers or not.


----------



## oldNgray (Aug 3, 2018)

3GSD4IPO said:


> I only clicked and rewarded when I got what I wanted. I gave him NO feedback for the incorrect response. I only rewarded the right response. It drove him crazy.


I was just thinking about this yesterday as I was watching a training video. The trainer rewarded the correct response and did nothing until the dog figured out the right thing. That seems well and good for the most part. But then I started to wonder how a dog would react when the time came to cut back on the rewards. Would she think no reward meant she did wrong?

I've watched videos where trainers used "nope" but thought it too close to "no," which I've always used for a naughty-dog correction. With my last dog, he heard an "ehh" (throat buzzer sound) as a warning not to follow through on something (like sniffing the trash). Usually, that's all that was needed. But I'd offer him a sharp "no" when I caught him doing something bad (like grabbing something from the trash or growling at an invited visitor).

I'm going to play this by ear. I'll probably start with no verbal correction, mostly in an effort not to send mixed signals. If I feel my pup get frustrated, I'll probably say, "Ooops" or "almost" or "try again" (no food reward) as a correction/encouragement acknowledgement. (Haven't decided on a phrase yet ... haven't decided on a lot of phrases or commands yet!)


----------



## Lillith (Feb 16, 2016)

It's think you were watching what is called "shaping". It's not like you say, "Here, dog, put this toy in the box." You teach them a combination of behaviors and very gradually increase the criteria to get rewarded. For example, I taught my dog to put toys in a box. I started with him putting his mouth on the toy, and he got rewarded. Then after he was consistently doing that, he had to pick the toy up off the ground to get rewarded. Then I moved the box over to him, and he had to drop the toy in the box to get rewarded. I moved the box just a ways away, and he had to take a single step to drop the toy in the box. Over the course of a few days, he learned to walk across the room, pick up a toy, and drop it in the box for a reward.

Through this entire process, I had to take steps back when I moved to the next chain of behaviors too quickly. I would point or stare at toys, I would lure him to the box with a treat. There was a lot of trial and error, but we learned together, without me ever marking a behavior I didn't want. If he got frustrated, I would give him a "hint." If he didn't do the right thing, I would just wait for the right thing, or make the criteria easier to meet. 

The point is, he was TRYING, and I want him to be excited about trying new things and learning, not be afraid that I'll say, "Nope, not right, try again" every time he did something wrong. Of course, its always going to be different for each dog, but I found making it easier for him to be successful and giving "hints" worked much better than simply saying "Nope, try again."

And for things like getting in the trash, making the trash inaccessible to the dog goes a long way, too.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Yes. And when introducing the concept to a dog who isn't experienced with learning that way, or for other reasons doesn't try stuff and offer behavior, shaping is usually somewhat assisted to prevent the dog from becoming frustrated or shutting down. You point, or you toss treats the way you want them to go, or you do something to get them moving and offering something and then you gradually build - *shape* - toward the desired behavior.

Once the dog understands the method they'll try things to see what gets them the reward and that's a game in itself for them.


----------



## Lillith (Feb 16, 2016)

CptJack said:


> Yes. And when introducing the concept to a dog who isn't experienced with learning that way, or for other reasons doesn't try stuff and offer behavior, shaping is usually somewhat assisted to prevent the dog from becoming frustrated or shutting down. You point, or you toss treats the way you want them to go, or you do something to get them moving and offering something and then you gradually build - *shape* - toward the desired behavior.
> 
> Once the dog understands the method they'll try things to see what gets them the reward and that's a game in itself for them.


Yes, that, too. I didn't start out training my dog to put toys in a box using shaping, because it is a complex behavior. We started with things like "sit", haha, or just putting his paw on a plastic container lid. Very easy. Once he understood that the point of the exercise was to try new things and see what got him a reward, it was much easier to get him to try things without prompts, but I still give hints and lure just because I think he does better with those types of feedback.


----------



## LeoRose (Aug 20, 2015)

This is a good blog post on shaping. http://k9infocus.com/why-im-not-a-fan-of-waiting-it-out-in-training/

And another excellent post about shaping. http://k9infocus.com/shaping-its-not-what-you-think-it-is/


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

Moonstream said:


> I'm not really sure about the logic behind this statement? A reward marker isn't distressing. To many dogs, a non-reward marker is distressing- even to the ones still able to work through that stress. It might not cause them so much stress that they stop trying, but that doesn't mean that it's not distressing to them.
> 
> From what I've seen of your activity on this forum, you have worked with one kind of dog, for one purpose. Exclusively. You seem to have a fair amount of experience in that one area, and have apparently titled dogs in your sport. That doesn't change the fact that you have only worked with one kind of dog. You are then giving people (people without the knowledge to understand the context your advice is coming from) advice about dogs that share few traits with the dogs you have experience with. That doesn't make for good advice.
> 
> ...


Actually you are quite incorrect, I have only discussed what I am doing now because I am doing that now. I had a variety of dogs on my farm and some were darn nice dogs that did not do a lick of work. They were stable. They were confident. They were well behaved. 

You mentions Mals and Dutchies. Mals are worked and handled VERY differently from GSD's and Dutchies.. are often nervy and somewhat Mal like but often have a bit too much nerve (and nerve is not a bad thing if balanced with other drives and a good dose of confidence). I used a GSD to herd cattle and they really are not driving herding dogs (they are genetically programmed to tend). That took some training but she worked out of our relationship and a love for the work. 

I personally have never washed a dog out. I have worked the dog in front of me. I started with a West German Show Line dog and she is NOT NOT NOT a working dog or what you would want in a working dog. I worked her anyway. I learned from her. The next dog also was no perfect (none are) and I took her all the way through. I had some set backs with her but we "got 'er done" and she was NOT an easy dog. 

The current dog is very very different from the others (aren't they all?) and he is well bred and the genes show. It is the first male in awhile and it is very different. He is also imperfect but he is a good dog. I am not a perfect trainer either. 

All three of these dogs actually worked better for me in free shaping if I added a negative marker. Most free shaping is silent other than the clicker or Yes. I am paying the dog for offering a behavior (or approximating and building toward a behavior). It may be something I will use in training (pivots of the back end around a front end on a pedestal) or it may be something silly that helps the dog with body awareness (like putting back feet in a box). If I say nothing (especially with the current dog) and I only reward when the dog approximates the desired behavior with no input he gets really frustrated. 

So, lets do an example. I want a back foot in a box. I have the box out. The dog interacts with the box. I click and treat at the box. Dog interacts with the box more realizing today's lesson has to do with the box. Now I up the ante (and there are breaks in this.. working in 3 minute intervals with 5 minutes or so of play and no session lasting more than 20 minutes at which point we stop and do this again a day later.. just to clarify that I am not working the dog for hours). When the back foot touches the box, click and reward. But that may take some time to get.. and if I just wait and give the dog no feed back he is practically doing back flips with the box trying to get that clicker to click. He gets a bit nutty and frustrated. 

HOWEVER if I quietly say "nope" he know that he does NOT get a reward for nope. He recognizes the negative marker as "Well, that is not it so now I try this other thing." Just letting him hang and try things with no input drive him a bit batty. 

That is all. No punishment. No beating dogs. No yelling. No nothing bad or evil. No corrections with e collars and prongs. Just simple FEEDBACK. 

He works happier. He learns faster. That is all I meant. 



Moonstream said:


> I should have clarified I mostly meant "bite sport". I am relatively new to the sport world (still in the training stage with my own dogs, not too many trials attended in person, and only really connected via the internet at this point). I will say- I have pretty much never seen people rehoming already owned dogs that they got for non bite sports rehoming dogs for reasons to do with drive. But I also think the majority of those people are getting a dog as a pet first, and a sport dog second.
> 
> I do see "this dog doesn't have the drive I want" posts almost daily on the bite work/working shepherd forums I am plugged into via facebook. Which, I should add, I have no inherent problem with. I understand that those dogs were often not taken on primarily as a pet. The dogs were bought as something else first (whether for work, as an experience builder, or for breeding), and then *also* as a companion/pet.
> 
> ...


I am not really for "washing a dog out" unless the dog is clearly not liking the work. I see too much of that in "bite sport" (which is really 3 phases of obedience, one of which the dog gets to bite). 

Now, there are competitors who want the "world team" and that is their main goal. They do wash dogs out but usually not quickly (these dogs mature slowly). Some make the world team. Some never do. Sometimes it is the dog. Sometimes it is the handler. Sometimes it is just the right combination of dog and handler and they end up making the world team. 

The rest of the handlers are.. well.. the rest of us. If I worked every dog thinking "world team" I would spend most of my dog training being disappointed. 

It is not that the nervy dog with no confidence is a bad thing. It can be a bad thing in the wrong hands. A very confident dog with high fight drive is a bad thing in the wrong hands. At the extreme ends of the spectrum, NEITHER dog is a good pet. The former is going to be a constant bite concern due to its fears. The latter might not even be a good IPO dog (might do much better as a Police Patrol dog in a very bad section of town or in a prison) but is just as much of a concern in an inexperienced pet home.

I don't know how simple negative marker feed back turned into a discussion of this..........................


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

If silence is frustrating your dog, rather than signaling 'try something else' you've screwed up your training foundations or are screwing up execution, frankly. 

A-) You should not be having big gaps without feedback from you, nrm or no. That means you mark-reward for every time the dog accidentally gets a back foot closer to the box, not just waiting for the dog to accidentally do what you want

B-) You reset frequently. Ie: Toss cookie AWAY so the dog comes back again.

But mostly your dog should not find silence from you that frustrating. And I deal with and own and train easily frustrated dogs.. This is an issue that you need to work on. It's either a lack of resilience, training mechanics failure on your end and your dog is telling you about it, or your dog has come to rely SO STRONGLY on you that she isn't okay/willing to think independently which is a MASSIVE problem later down the road.

That's not even me being snarky (because we both know we don't like each other). It's a symptom of a pretty big problem and, whether you use NRM or not (I don't care), you need to address it before it bites you in the butt.


----------



## LeoRose (Aug 20, 2015)

3GSD4IPO said:


> All three of these dogs actually worked better for me in free shaping if I added a negative marker. Most free shaping is silent other than the clicker or Yes. I am paying the dog for offering a behavior (or approximating and building toward a behavior). It may be something I will use in training (pivots of the back end around a front end on a pedestal) or it may be something silly that helps the dog with body awareness (like putting back feet in a box). If I say nothing (especially with the current dog) and I only reward when the dog approximates the desired behavior with no input he gets really frustrated.



Again, I refer you to this. http://k9infocus.com/shaping-its-not-what-you-think-it-is/

"Unfortunately, the practice of free shaping is often poorly understood and poorly applied. In some cases people assume that all shaping is free shaping. This can lead to confusing and chaotic training sessions with no real goals."

Also, if your dog finds silence so frustrating, what are you going to do in a trial, where you can't keep talking to them? https://denisefenzi.com/2017/12/the-sound-of-silence/


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

CptJack said:


> If silence is frustrating your dog, rather than signaling 'try something else' you've screwed up your training foundations or are screwing up execution, frankly.
> 
> A-) You should not be having big gaps without feedback from you, nrm or no. That means you mark-reward for every time the dog accidentally gets a back foot closer to the box, not just waiting for the dog to accidentally do what you want
> 
> ...


It is likely I am an imperfect trainer. I think we all are to a degree. 

I have none of the issues with independent thinking on the dog's part. Truly do not. 

And yes, I do know that approximating the behavior (foot closer to the box and so forth) is the method. I have trained... a couple of dogs... successfully. I certainly do not say "nope" frequently. It is just a bit of feedback. Not constant. Certainly not forever. Just a little help. We do break off frequently. Too much is too much and from the first instructor I had for free shaping it is no more than 3 minutes on and then longer off. If I get what I want in 1 minute we break there. Of course. 



> That's not even me being snarky (_because we both know we don't like each other_). It's a symptom of a pretty big problem and, whether you use NRM or not (I don't care), you need to address it before it bites you in the butt.


HOW do you KNOW we don't Like Each Other. Good grief. we are not F2F and we have never even talked. Not. Once. Ever. We actually MIGHT like each other. In fact (news flash) we might even learn something from each other F2F with dogs. Just being a spotter for "whatever." Remember, IPO and most other dog sports is about obedience that enhances or promotes other behaviors the dog finds rewarding. 

I can read anything and disagree and then at some point meet the author and find out the person is actually pretty delightful. I don't _assume_ dislike from a forum. 



LeoRose said:


> Again, I refer you to this. http://k9infocus.com/shaping-its-not-what-you-think-it-is/
> 
> "Unfortunately, the practice of free shaping is often poorly understood and poorly applied. In some cases people assume that all shaping is free shaping. This can lead to confusing and chaotic training sessions with no real goals."
> 
> Also, if your dog finds silence so frustrating, what are you going to do in a trial, where you can't keep talking to them? https://denisefenzi.com/2017/12/the-sound-of-silence/


Whoa. Let's back up a bit. In this I am not talking all the time to the dog (causes grey and I know people who train like this). In a _learning a new behavior_ situation I do give some feed back. 

It is sort of like tossing the ball for the dog in autumn. They miss seeing it go out and there are lots of leaves on the ground. Seeing a yellow ball in yellow leaves is sort of hard. So the dog is searching. I use the "hotter" and "colder" words. I do the same when I hid something for the dog to find. All I am saying is letting the dog know that biting the box is not exactly what we are doing with a "nope" lets him know it is not going to be rewarded. He's not a gold fish. We keep it fun (I know I know.. you don't believe I can ever be fun for my dog if I put a prong collar or an e collar on him but we do have fun). 

Of course we are not throwing a ball or carrying a clicker in a trial. In fact, by the time we are trial ready we cannot use most body language or hand signals of any kind or it is "handler help.." We also cannot reward or correct. Simply shrugging your shoulders a tiny bit as you take in a breath to recall your dog can be construed as "handler help." Huge point deductions. 

We DO pattern train with predictable reward delivery. At the second gun shot, we throw the ball. At the about turn. After the group and saying "thank you group." The pattern is the same so we use it. We also reward at other random times so that trial ready dog thinks that ball can come at any moment. Then it doesn't but at the next trail marker it is supposed to. Then it doesn't.. but there is always another trial marker.. and so forth to the end of the routine. 

Of course THAT can backfire if your dog gets more and more jacked thinking "next time" there will be a ball (and the dog is the sort that gets jacked). It can be even more dicey on a cold day with such a dog.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> .. and if I just wait and give the dog no feed back he is practically doing back flips with the box trying to get that clicker to click. He gets a bit nutty and frustrated.
> 
> HOWEVER if I quietly say "nope" he know that he does NOT get a reward for nope. He recognizes the negative marker as "Well, that is not it so now I try this other thing." Just letting him hang and try things with no input drive him a bit batty.
> 
> That is all. *No punishment.* No beating dogs. No yelling. No nothing bad or evil. No corrections with e collars and prongs. Just simple FEEDBACK.


Feedback, maybe. But if your use of an NRM _decreases_ the nutty, batty, really frustrated behaviour -- then it actually IS punishment. "Feedback", at least by my definition and in the context of shaping and free-shaping etc, is something that should bring you measurably closer to your goal.

In most cases, NRMs (or impending use thereof) serve little purpose other than to remind the handler that they're lumping instead of splitting. Case in point:



> I want a back foot in a box. I have the box out. The dog interacts with the box. I click and treat at the box.* Dog interacts with the box* more realizing today's lesson has to do with the box. *Now I up the ante.* [ /edit] *When the back foot touches the box*, click and reward.* But that may take some time to get.. and if I just wait *and give the dog no feed back he is practically doing back flips with the box trying to get that clicker to click. He gets a bit nutty and frustrated.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Of course we are not throwing a ball or carrying a clicker in a trial. In fact, by the time we are trial ready we cannot use most body language or hand signals of any kind or it is "handler help.." We also cannot reward or correct.


 Sure you can. 

Just for example. In Comp OB I take a clicker with me, legally and in plain view of the judge, each and every time my dogs and I enter the trial ring. And I also reward my dog numerous times per run. Corrections? personally speaking? infrequently. But yeah those happen too. 

If you believe you *cannot*, it would seem you still have much to learn.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> Sure you can.
> 
> Just for example. In Comp OB I take a clicker with me, legally and in plain view of the judge, each and every time my dogs and I enter the trial ring. And I also reward my dog numerous times per run. Corrections? personally speaking? infrequently. But yeah those happen too.
> 
> If you believe you *cannot*, it would seem you still have much to learn.


If you did that in an IPO TRIAL you would be DQ'd and be all done. A clicker? In plain sight? nope nope nope nope.... 

They even make you carry the leash in your right pocket or diagonally across your body with the snap on the right side away from the dog. You can carry NOTHING on you. You cannot pet your dog between exercises.. Maybe a light pat after the retrieves.. and that is it. You can say NOTHING other than the commands. You cannot even use the dog's name as part of the command or it is counted as an extra command! I use a smile in my training routine to let the dog know he is OK and doing it right. I am waiting for the rules to remove even that. Even animated walking or running can get you for "handler help." Tilting your head, clearing your throat, coughing.. all can be "handler help" and points off. 

The ONLY time you can overtly use body language in the send out.. and you direct AND say "Voraus." The only other time is the blind search in protection.. and the dog enters the blind you say the dog's name and as they exit to the next blind you can say "Here!" As the dog gets to you, you can direct with your hand to the next blind and say the search word you are using. 

I recently saw a dog and handler team DQ because the handler let the word "no" slip out when the dog was not staying with him on the way down the field to set up for the courage test. Others have DQ'd for saying the dog's name. 

IPO is such that if you are at the hotel or anywhere else during the competition you cannot correct your dog or put any corrective devices on your dog and if you are seen you can be DQ'd there as well. 

I know someone who corrected their dog waiting to track and they were DQ'd. A tight leash can be construed as a correction. Including at the hotel. Your dog "lighting up" at other dogs or people can DQ you. At the hotel. At the parking lot. 

In tracking when the dog stops at an article if you bend over and neatly lay the leash on the ground as opposed to dropping it when the dog stops (before walking up pick up the article and restart the dog) it can be construed as handler help. 

I have seen the points lost and the DQ's happen. Heck.. I was DQ'd because I hit the wall with the Dumbbell and it did not go over! 

I have not done AKC ob in forever (tho I do help at matches) and I did train some rally but actually hated it so never competed in that. I am assuming you are competing Canadian Kennel Club or UKC etc venue???


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> Feedback, maybe. But if your use of an NRM _decreases_ the nutty, batty, really frustrated behaviour -- then it actually IS punishment. "Feedback", at least by my definition and in the context of shaping and free-shaping etc, is something that should bring you measurably closer to your goal.
> 
> In most cases, NRMs (or impending use thereof) serve little purpose other than to remind the handler that they're lumping instead of splitting. Case in point:


I get tired of typing. Of course I click and reward for approximations. I said that somewhere up there in one of the replies. Near the box with the back foot gets a mark and reward. I actually do get the splitting and lumping thing (and did a lot of the latter with my first dog but learned to break it down further). Smaller increments increase the speed of learning. 

My point is I give the dog feedback. That is all. 

I find the quiet "nope" is beneficial. It is not coupled with anything other than no reward. No beating of the dog or yanking of the leash or pushing the ecollar button. I know you are hoping I say that I am doing all those things so you can stomp on me. LOL NEVER in a learning new behavior situation. Sorry. 

In fact, the whole thing starts in a garage with no equipment other than a collar on the dog, a clicker in my hand, some food and a quiet "nope" or "yup" when the dog seems to be frustrated. Same as "cold" and "hot" searching for a yellow ball in yellow maple leaves. 

I agree, leaving the dog frustrated is not a good thing, so I don't do that. I don't like to be frustrated so why do that to the dog (tho this forum can be very frustrating). 

If occasional feedback helps the learning process and gets results and does not physically, emotionally or mentally harm the dog _why are you acting as if it is harming the dog, the training and the outcome?_


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> Actually you are quite incorrect, I have only discussed what I am doing now because I am doing that now. I had a variety of dogs on my farm and some were darn nice dogs that did not do a lick of work. They were stable. They were confident. They were well behaved.


Okay, so please tell us what type of training you personally did with these dogs, and what breeds they were.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

You know, I'm not going to respond to most of what was directed at me, but I will say this:

I have met quite a few people from various online groups in person. I also have a pretty good, solid, local dog community that I've mad some very good friends in them. The methods that people use in training their dog has nothing to do with whether we get along or not. Some of them use prongs or e-collars or whatever. 

What they all have in common those is a desire to *learn*. They seek out knowledge. When (and if) they choose to apply it? If things go pear shaped their question is always 'what am I doing wrong' or 'what am I not understanding'? They don't throw the entire method, that works - and they've seen work - out the window and declare it stupid, or ineffective. They assume they're missing something and either seek to fill that gap or admit they're bad at it (them, not the method is bad) and find another method. 

When they don't have experience with something, like a dog type or a training method, or a situation they straight up say 'I have no idea' and go looking for more info. "I don't know, my dog is nothing like that" or 'I've never trained that' isn't uncommon to hear - at all.

And. The ones who use punishment? Like prongs and e-collars? Every last one says 'Yeah, it works through pain' and 'It isn't damaging to my dog, I wouldn't do it to _______ (dog that isn't suited for it)" Just like I'll say 'Positive reward can replace but does not reduce behavior". 

So, you know, your methods aren't why I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be friends. 

Your arrogance and unwillingness to admit that your knowledge and methods are limited *is*.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I don't care if you you no reward markers for the record - sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. I used one in the trail ring to correct a missed weave entry in my 18 month old debuting dog, actually. 

I do think insisting that they are NECESSARY to shape behavior is a whole 'other ball of wax. 

they aren't. If you know how to shape effectively. 

Not knowing isn't a crime. Not admitting you don't know... also not illegal, but kind of crappy to blame the method for your shortcomings.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> I am assuming you are competing Canadian Kennel Club or UKC etc venue???


 Yes I compete in CKC obedience trials. 

I've had my particular breed of dogs for 35+ years. Within that time frame I've put numerous titles on numerous dogs, including CGNs, conformation CHs, and obedience titles. Some of which were on purchased dogs, others were on dogs of my own breeding. I also hold CKC Top Dog Awards (similar to AKC Dog World Awards) for nationally ranked #1 obedience dog in breed for 3 years, almost consecutively. Among many other notable achievements, I've successfully taught competitive obedience classes for approximately 8 years now and counting, as well. 

I just prefer not to stick my chest out about it and advertise these types of things in my signature. It's simply a matter of personal choice, and trying to remain humble, I suppose. But mostly so that my advice here can be judged on the merits of my words alone. 

Anyways, yeah. This certainly ain't my first rodeo, LOL.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Um. 

I don't put titles in my signature to puff my chest out. I put them there to keep track of them and because they make me happy - same as the dog pictures, though I keep track of those without the signature ;-) . I do, however, occasionally use them to bludgeon someone who acts like I got a dog yesterday, which is not terribly mature, but they aren't there because I'm arrogant.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

CptJack said:


> I don't care if you you no reward markers for the record - sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. I used one in the trail ring to correct a missed weave entry in my 18 month old debuting dog, actually.
> 
> I do think insisting that they are NECESSARY to shape behavior is a whole 'other ball of wax.
> 
> ...


I have shaped effectively. It is not the only answer (that is my only point). It is a better answer than the past... and I am pretty old. 

There are dogs that need more structure. There are dogs that would crumble under that same structure. It is the most fascinating thing to figure out which works for that dog. I do not blame the method. I simply have seen that some methods do not work on some dogs if those methods are used exclusively. For other dogs they work just fine. 

A no reward marker (negative marker) isn't going to kill the dog's spirit any more than a positive reward marker is going to kill the dog. That said, I have seen dogs fearful of the sound of the clicker and fearful of a happy YES (these were dogs in classes and not my dogs). I have seen dogs that are just plain fearful genetically and very unstable as a result. In some cases the best answer for these dogs is euthanization (though rescues often put them up as poster children for abuse to get donations). 

I have seen people "over dogged" and using R+ only and ending up with a dangerous dog. It isn't the method that killed those dogs. It is the fact that the user was totally unable to provide the structure the dog needed. The method is not at fault. The dog is not at fault. The HANDLER is always at fault. In the cases where the method failed it was very sad indeed. A fine animal was destroyed because that animal came to rule the house and the people in it. 

When that animal was provided structure in each and every case the dog was fine.. for about 3 days. The person who had the dog is very experienced with strong dogs and knows not to go "Ooohh poor Pooky" around the crate.. knows not to make direct eye contact... knows to be efficient and very clear in their movements around the dog. Around day three the dog simply decides "Enough. I am not getting my way. I am walked on a leash. I am in a kennel or a crate. I am not running the show here" and the fight begins. NEVER initiated by the handler. Dogs get angry. The only way they can express their anger is with their teeth. At that point they are dangerous. In different hands as young dogs they would have been truly wonderful working dogs but the opportunity was missed, the owners were poorly equipped an/or refused to take any instruction from the breeder (who they did call and who did go to their home and help them and, in all cases, more than once). 

In my lifetime of being around dogs I started with the old crank and yank and the dog will do it because I said to do it. Oh the dogs did "whatever" but it was always a fight to teach it and not fun for anyone. I was a kid at the time. 

Now we are here today. It is a much better day for dogs and for training. When I teach a puppy (thru free shaping) to put its front feet on a pedestal and step around that with the hind feet it is fun for both of us. And it teaches back end awareness like nothing else. Agility trainers use touch and touch pads. We steal that in IPO for several things. I use it for the scaling wall (you all have an A frame). 

I took agility classes with one dog.. the instruction was lacking because the dogs that person understood were not the dog I had. Still, I took away what I could use. 

I took a rally class and, again, the instruction would have worked fine on a softer dog but it was clearly not working for the dog I had. I recall at the time (this was before I did any Schutzhund/IPO/IGP) wishing I had that softer dog. At the time there was no one who could relate to my dog and her drives. I did not so I moved on to AKC obedience. I titled there. Got my Q's and my blue ribbons. 

I trained a GSD to herd cattle. I had no idea what I was doing but my dog made up for my lack and genetically was programmed to do the job. She was corrected ONCE on a long line (standard flat collar) for going in when she was not supposed to. After that she "got it" and worked off whistles and hand signals. I never knew why she worked so well until a wise man (now deceased) told me that the dog understood that obedience to my requests got her what she wanted which was to herd.. her drive was satisfied through obedience and partnership. I learned this long after that dog was gone (as were the cows and the farm). 

So here we are today. I certainly do NOT know everything. I can be unclear with my dog at times. I can see my mistakes as the dog is a mirror in which those mistakes reflect back to me. I am imperfect. My dog is imperfect. We work through it. We will make mistakes. We will need to "fix" things. There will be times when I say "next puppy I am going to..... ). Of course, at my age I am not sure how many "next puppies" there will be. I think one more. 

Perhaps the issue is the communication through the written word. I used all four quadrants when I train my dogs. Most of the training is R+ because that is how you build a dog and a team. A NRM is simply clarifying something to the dog and my only intention was to say it works for me. 
Maybe it would be unnecessary with a different trainer. In teaching the dog the goal is to obtain a consistent behavioral response through understanding. It is a process. Both dog and trainer should enjoy the process. 

AFTER the dog thoroughly understands the behavior and will respond to the word we add speed and drive with a toy and body language.. then we fade body language and then we build duration. At some point we may need to use pressure to solidify "have to" but in that one must be careful. Too much and you get unreliability. Too little and you are nagging the dog. Sometimes you leave something alone because, while imperfect, to tweak it may remove something about the behavior that is truly desirable. 

Then you do all of that and are to the point of being trial ready and you get out there and the dog (sometimes) will do something completely unique and unpredictable and you come off the field saying, "Well, he never did THAT before... " and so we laugh and we learn.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> Yes I compete in CKC obedience trials.
> 
> I've had my particular breed of dogs for 35+ years. Within that time frame I've put numerous titles on numerous dogs, including CGNs, conformation CHs, and obedience titles. Some of which were on purchased dogs, others were on dogs of my own breeding. I also hold CKC Top Dog Awards (similar to AKC Dog World Awards) for nationally ranked #1 obedience dog in breed for 3 years, almost consecutively. Among many other notable achievements, I've successfully taught competitive obedience classes for approximately 8 years now and counting, as well.
> 
> ...


And you have had fun doing all this I am sure. It is VERY different from what I am doing now. However, I am seeing more and more in the AKC ob ring dogs showing more drive, more "life" and focus. I used to do AKC ob but then I got introduced to Schutzhund (now IPO and soon to be IGP). At first I thought it was easy (good handler make it LOOK easy). Then I started training it. As you can see from my comments above it is NOT easy. Ha! 

But then I used to train dressage horses where you cannot show your movements either so it sort of fits. The big difference is that you can use rewards riding a horse by simple releases and you can be very subtle. Dogs are harder. We don't sit on them! LOL

I applaud your successes. Good on you!

I only put the accomplishments in the signature so that (maybe) people know where I am coming from. Maybe most do not. I don't know. It honors the dogs. It certainly does not honor me. 

I do know this. One of the most accomplished people in the Schutzhund/IPO sport world (won nationals a few times, been on the podium at the worlds etc.) did not think I would get an IPO 3 on the dog in my signature. He worked that dog from a young age in seminars I took from him. He knows way more than I do.. probably more than I ever will. He said that I really earned that title on a dog he would have washed out. 

No one ever told me she would not title. No one ever said, "You will be lucky to get that dog trained.." 
Since no one told me "You can't" I went ahead and "did." Hearing "can't" after you did leaves me with a smile. Good on you little Greta. You deserve the recognition.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> "Actually you are quite incorrect, I have only discussed what I am doing now because I am doing that now. I had a variety of dogs on my farm and some were darn nice dogs that did not do a lick of work. They were stable. They were confident. They were well behaved."
> 
> Okay, so please tell us what type of training you personally did with these dogs, and what breeds they were.


I'm guessing you didn't see my question, as you've posted several times this morning without answering it, so I'll post it again. Please answer.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> If you did that in an IPO TRIAL you would be DQ'd and be all done. A clicker? In plain sight? nope nope nope nope....


 Just to keep the record straight, in case readers were wondering. FYI, a "trial-legal" clicker: https://goo.gl/images/PogZmj

There are many ways to communicate surreptitiously during a trial run, if someone has the will to do so. For example, a slightly exaggerated eye-blink can easily be conditioned for use as a secondary reinforcer. 

Personally though, I prefer to stay entirely on the up and up and within the spirit of the rules, for the sake of honesty and integrity.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

LittleFr0g said:


> Okay, so please tell us what type of training you personally did with these dogs, and what breeds they were.


Standard poodles (before I was farming).  Pets. Well behaved super nice dogs. ALWAYS up for a game. Any game. Any time. 

Then there was a Shepherd/Husky mix. He was a good boy. He got cornered by three female cats in the barn once (they had combined all their kittens in a box in the corner and the poor dog made the mistake of walking by and all three Momma cats cornered him and beat him up.. it was funny actually.. this was b4 I spayed and neutered all the farm cats). He would stay in heel position when you drove out on the tractor or next to a horse.
These was Rass. She was a designer dog (Golden and Lab cross). A GREAT dog. The best. Went everywhere with me. 

There was Sheba.. Black Lab mix. She was dumped on a neighbor's farm preggo with 8 puppies. She had the puppies and they gave the puppies away. They were going to shoot her (no need to feed another dog or pay to spay her I guess). I took her. A more loyal dog you would never find. Smart. Could go to the store with you and never have a leash. Never interacted with other people. Just stuck with me. 

George.. from the shelter. Nice dog but allergic to cows. Super well trained. I had to return him due to his allergies. Away from cows he was fine. Around cows the poor dog was sick all the time and had to be on prednisone. I returned him for his own good. Beautiful dog.. no idea the breeds in there. He was off leash well trained too. I trained him. I even went back to the shelter to walk him. 

And the first shepherd.. who herded cattle and went everywhere with me as well. Never wore a collar and leash after the age of 2. Another really good dog.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> Just to keep the record straight, in case readers were wondering. FYI, a "trial-legal" clicker: https://goo.gl/images/PogZmj
> 
> There are many ways to communicate surreptitiously during a trial run, if someone has the will to do so. For example, a slightly exaggerated eye-blink can easily be conditioned for use as a secondary reinforcer.
> 
> Personally though, I prefer to stay entirely on the up and up and within the spirit of the rules, for the sake of honesty and integrity.


Yep. It's very, very easy to take all kinds of punishments and rewards into the ring with you - all it takes is you, your dog, and your relationship, in any sport. I have punished the CRAP out of my dogs (accidentally) by getting anxious and frustrated (or worse - confused and abruptly stopped running/giving feedback, that's hugely punishing for them), and rewarded them by being super happy. 

Some time put in to 'cheat' and the options become even more broad. 'Spin' as a cue is a secondary reinforcer for my dogs. I could EASILY use that on the agility field. Loss of time but not against the rules to do other commands between. I *don't*, because of the spirit of the rules, but if you, your dog, and the relationship are there - you have reinforcers and punishment. 

But. Dogs aren't idiots. They read you. They know what your moods mean to them. Thinking you can't punish or reward without equipment is just ... well, kind of short sighted, at best.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Standard poodles (before I was farming). Pets. Well behaved super nice dogs. ALWAYS up for a game. Any game. Any time.
> 
> Then there was a Shepherd/Husky mix. He was a good boy. He got cornered by three female cats in the barn once (they had combined all their kittens in a box in the corner and the poor dog made the mistake of walking by and all three Momma cats cornered him and beat him up.. it was funny actually.. this was b4 I spayed and neutered all the farm cats). He would stay in heel position when you drove out on the tractor or next to a horse.
> These was Rass. She was a designer dog (Golden and Lab cross). A GREAT dog. The best. Went everywhere with me.
> ...


Thank you, you only answered part of my question though. What kind of training did you do with these dogs?


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> Just to keep the record straight, in case readers were wondering. FYI, a "trial-legal" clicker: https://goo.gl/images/PogZmj
> 
> There are many ways to communicate surreptitiously during a trial run, if someone has the will to do so. For example, a slightly exaggerated eye-blink can easily be conditioned for use as a secondary reinforcer.
> 
> Personally though, I prefer to stay entirely on the up and up and within the spirit of the rules, for the sake of honesty and integrity.


If you clicked the snap on a leash in an IPO trial you would be DQ'd. You cannot touch the leash. 
Like I said, I train the Smile as a secondary reinforcer. You cannot do much else. I do pattern train so the dog thinks a ball is coming at certain points. If the ball does not come there, then they are like "Oh she forgot" and we go to the next trial marker and the dog expects a ball there.. when none is delivered we move to the next one. The issue can be the dog will get jacked up and start pushing you for the ball and that can lead to points off for crowding and pushing. 

You start with 100 points. You need 70 to pass. It is amazing how quickly 30 points can be flushed down the toilet...


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

LittleFr0g said:


> Thank you, you only answered part of my question though. What kind of training did you do with these dogs?


Mostly yank and crank. Food rewards when they were puppies. Instead of luring into a sit, the old way was to push the butt down. Teaching recall was on a long line with a yank and reeling them in. All done when they were little. In spite of all of that, these were happy dogs. I did not have a prong collar or an e collar. That said, I did have a choke collar (flat strap). I also had a release word. I DID use food. 

Most of the time I think these dogs were so happy to be with someone and going places and doing stuff.. off and on the farm. I think the rewards were there but I had no idea what they were. Like I said, years after the dog was gone I was taught the reason she worked cattle so well is that was her genetic drive. She had enough "pack drive" to partner with me and she used my requests/obedience to satisfy her drive.

FWIW I do not train like this anymore. I use very little pressure. I do use drive satisfaction. I do free shape. I do use P+ where necessary but not often (it is not often needed).


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Mostly yank and crank. Food rewards when they were puppies. Instead of luring into a sit, the old way was to push the butt down. Teaching recall was on a long line with a yank and reeling them in. All done when they were little. In spite of all of that, these were happy dogs. I did not have a prong collar or an e collar. That said, I did have a choke collar (flat strap). I also had a release word. I DID use food.
> 
> Most of the time I think these dogs were so happy to be with someone and going places and doing stuff.. off and on the farm. I think the rewards were there but I had no idea what they were. Like I said, years after the dog was gone I was taught the reason she worked cattle so well is that was her genetic drive. She had enough "pack drive" to partner with me and she used my requests/obedience to satisfy her drive.
> 
> FWIW I do not train like this anymore. I use very little pressure. I do use drive satisfaction. I do free shape. I do use P+ where necessary but not often (it is not often needed).


So, you only taught them basic obedience then? Is that correct?


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

I apologize Little Frog for not answering. 

I did not mean to ignore and certainly have no intention of being rude. I was jumping on and off.. and I missed your question. 

It is gratifying to see impassioned dog trainers discussing things. The written word is often frustrating and much tends to be assumed and that can create communication issues.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

LittleFr0g said:


> So, you only taught them basic obedience then? Is that correct?


Up until I started herding cattle. Then I taught that and it was invaluable. 

Some of this was over 45 years ago and there wasn't much in the way of help. There were books.. and most were not good. There was no internet. The first good dog book I read was Jean Donaldson (so that is pretty recent) and then Patricia McConnell.. that led to some Karen Pryor.. and a little Leerburg (but I was not thrilled with Leerburg).


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Up until I started herding cattle. Then I taught that and it was invaluable.
> 
> Some of this was over 45 years ago and there wasn't much in the way of help. There were books.. and most were not good. There was no internet. The first good dog book I read was Jean Donaldson (so that is pretty recent) and then Patricia McConnell.. that led to some Karen Pryor.. and a little Leerburg (but I was not thrilled with Leerburg).


I appreciate your answers, but going from what you have said, Moonstream's comments actually were completely accurate. You had some poodles and a lab mix, but otherwise all your dogs were GSD mixes or GSDs, and you didn't do any serious training with them. All of your training experience HAS been with a single breed type, you DON'T have experience training a wide variety of breeds and dogs. This is what people have been trying to tell you. You could learn so much and be such a valuable asset to this forum if you would only set ego aside and truly LISTEN to the people commenting in these threads. They have an incredibly vast well of knowledge that you really could benefit a great deal from, but you must listen first.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

The other thing you admit here, outright, is that you don't have experience with working with any dogs, regardless of breed or level of training, who aren't stable and confident dogs. 

Whole lotta people out there don't have those dogs. 

And they're still good dogs, they're still loved, they're in families now and being able to work with them is important when you give advice. You can't just assume everyone is going to say 'this dog is defective, I'm not keeping it'. Because they are, and they need advice that applies to them and their dog and their life. 

Which are only rarely a stable, confident, dog living on a farm or in a kennel.

(What would you have done faced with a lacking confidence, incredibly fearful, incredibly SOFT/sensitive border collie? Gotten another dog, probably. That makes your experience and advice limited in applicability and your experience, yeah, limited.)


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

CptJack said:


> The other thing you admit here, outright, is that you don't have experience with working with any dogs, regardless of breed or level of training, who aren't stable and confident dogs.
> 
> Whole lotta people out there don't have those dogs.
> 
> ...


No. I would not and have not. I have a soft and sensitive dog in my older show dog. She is a bit "weird" and confidence is not her thing. She is so conflicted that she will spin and vocalize while being petted because some genes say "want petting" and other genes say, "scared to want petting." I advocate for her. Do not touch her. She is happy then. She might bring you a toy and tease you. She might. 

Instead of "getting rid" of the dog I drove 270 miles round trip every Sunday for nearly 3 years for us to learn IPO. I had been training locally but the decoy noted the fear in this dog and said that for him to continue to work her would make her unstable. I contacted the owner of the sire (a dog that had won the worlds two years in a row). She had me come to her trainer and so I did. 

My dog was literally the worst dog there. She was a show dog and nervy. She started out by exhibiting avoidance. She sniffed the ground. Everyone else training there had been to National Level competition. Then there was me.... I worried for a YEAR they would throw me out for having the worst dog there. Finally I asked them.. are you going to throw us out? 

Now there are decoys who would have and training groups that would have. They told me they wanted me to keep coming as I would learn more from this dog than from a more appropriate dog. So I kept coming. 

BTW here is a video of that decoy.. and yes, that is a JRT... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of0tm5Vlbpc

It took time, but due to an excellent training decoy who trained the dog in front of him (and not the dog he WISHED was in front of him) we brought this dog along. She actually went from avoidance to dragging me out to the field for protection. She still had conflict. She was still dependent. She tried her best to be a team member. She gave all she could give. Then the training group disbanned and the next decoy was not as good. In fact, that fellow made it clear he hated my dog. We never went past a Bh. 

Meanwhile I had gotten the next dog. The same guy who hated my other dog also hated this dog. He hated anyone who was not going for "world class" level. I was still driving every weekend but further now. This guy would set up training and then cancel 15 minutes before we were to meet for tracking. I was there... and drove home with no training. That happened a few times. Finally it happened and I was done. He damaged my dog with his advice and from him I learned that too much pressure can take an average dog (and my dog was average) and make it less... because he also did not know how to take the pressure off and he was no help in showing the dog how to take the pressure off. 

I called my one training cohort.. and said I was all done. Well we got together and started our own group and eventually a club. Our Decoy is a top of the line training decoy. I am lucky. With this group I got my titles on this second dog who was not supposed to get titled. It was a lot of work. Certainly would never have titled but I was determined. She was a defensive dog. Not super confident but enough drive to work past it. She will always be a great tracking dog. 

Dogs are defective. All of them. Every. Last. One. 

Trainers are defective. All of them. Every. Last. One. 

Handlers are defective. All of them. Every. Last. One. 



> What would you have done faced with a lacking confidence, incredibly fearful, incredibly SOFT/sensitive border collie? Gotten another dog, probably. That makes your experience and advice limited in applicability and your experience, yeah, limited.


I would have asked to learn how to get the dog to herd cattle and use it's "eye." Oh yes.. I did train with BC's for awhile. In fact, I handled sheep at trials and joined the regional association. I never owned a BC. I was no longer farming and had no need and nothing to herd. I also had no interest in agility and had lost interest in AKC obedience. I was not wealthy enough to own a BC and then go to herding lessons regularly (there are two great trainers and facilities near by). And in the end I would have had a working dog that had no job unless I went to a lesson. 

I have to say that if the dog (any dog) was a bite risk due to fear I would PTS. To this day, if a dog is so fearful (or fearful aggressive or aggressive) as to be a bite risk I will PTS and I will recommend same. 

No dog is worth losing my home for. A dog that fearful is not having much fun living and I won't have any fun living with it. I won't waste money or time resources on any animal that is a liability. So far I have not had such a dog. 

And if that makes me "awful" I am fine with that.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

That's great. What do you do when they're not a herding breed, has no herding instinct/ability, is not owned by someone with livestock or all of the above? What if it's a, I don't know, a pomeranian in an apartment in NYC? That *isn't* a bite risk, naturally, since those are all dead and you won't bother (pro tip: You can advise what you want, but there are still people out there working successfully with those dogs because they have, get this, skills and experience you don't have!) 

(PS: A truly fearful, soft, dog would never be allowed to continue in IPO by any handler worth their salt. ONe lacking confidence, yes, but not a super soft one who doesn't handle pressure OR a truly fearful one. Doing so creates a liability, but speaking of bite risk-)

Here's another one: How do you determine a dog that's a bite risk versus one that 'displays' but is not? Online in particular, but also in person. Without actually getting anyone bitten. Because actual bite risks being euthed is a thing I think people need not to feel guilty about, but advising people to put down their dog because it's a bite risk when reality is 'person assessing can't tell the difference' is FIRMLY in of 'what is wrong with you, are you an actual psychopath'? territory.

*I* know what the difference is and how, by the way. I'm trying to figure out if you do.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

CptJack said:


> That's great. What do you do when they're not a herding breed, has no herding instinct/ability, is not owned by someone with livestock or all of the above? What if it's a, I don't know, a pomeranian in an apartment in NYC? That *isn't* a bite risk, naturally, since those are all dead and you won't bother (pro tip: You can advise what you want, but there are still people out there working successfully with those dogs because they have, get this, skills and experience you don't have!)
> 
> (PS: A truly fearful, soft, dog would never be allowed to continue in IPO by any handler worth their salt. ONe lacking confidence, yes, but not a super soft one who doesn't handle pressure OR a truly fearful one. Doing so creates a liability, but speaking of bite risk-)
> 
> ...


Very well said, Becky. Also, what do you do if the dog is so incredibly fearful that it simply isn't CAPABLE of focusing on learning anything, let alone herding?

Also, cattle? Really? You would take a severely fearful dog and put it on cattle, not broke sheep? Really?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjadwIRkE7o

^INCREDIBLY fear aggressive (well, formerly) dog who lost her mind at everything. The mistakes in those runs are handling errors - like me pulling her off an obstacle (first and last run) and me being IN FRONT OF what I need her to take and pushing her off it (middle run). 

Look, I accept I don't know how to train a lot of things - IPO among them - and there are dogs I'd be a bit lost with. I'm not omnipotent and there is room for me to learn quite a bit about a lot. 

But I know how to work with a bunch of dogs. I have skills from that. I have learned from that. And that includes fear aggressive, difficult dogs, and low drive and low confidence dogs ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYzri7Ujyg ) and entirely stable baby dogs who just don't know what's up yet (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vquuNg-fusY) and a lot of dogs between. And not just 'in life' though that's important but to fairly good levels of sports performance in challenging environments. 

That you don't is okay. That you don't want it is okay. It just means MAYBE DON'T PRETEND YOU ARE EQUIPPED TO ADVISE PEOPLE about those things. Just like I keep my mouth shut about IPO training questions when they show up.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> If you clicked the snap on a leash in an IPO trial you would be DQ'd. You cannot touch the leash.


So. The leash is MAGICALLY disconnected and re-connected without touching it, during transition from on leash heeling to off leash heeling, and post-recall portions of a BH test ??? What about when the team enters and exits the field on leash, during I, II, and III ??? Think about it.

I've thought about it. Seems like all of those would be potential opportunities to utilize the sound of the clasp as a conditioned reinforcer, if the handler feels so inclined. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm here to learn.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> So. The leash is MAGICALLY disconnected and re-connected without touching it, during transition from on leash heeling to off leash heeling, and post-recall portions of a BH test ??? What about when the team enters and exits the field on leash, during I, II, and III ??? Think about it.
> 
> I've thought about it. Seems like all of those would be potential opportunities to utilize the sound of the clasp as a conditioned reinforcer, if the handler feels so inclined. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm here to learn.


I strongly believe that this person doesn't know what a conditioned reinforcer is, frankly.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> So. The leash is MAGICALLY disconnected and re-connected without touching it, during transition from on leash heeling to off leash heeling, and post-recall portions of a BH test ??? What about when the team enters and exits the field on leash, during I, II, and III ??? Think about it.
> 
> I've thought about it. Seems like all of those would be potential opportunities to utilize the sound of the clasp as a conditioned reinforcer, if the handler feels so inclined. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm here to learn.


BH is the only routine with on leash heeling.
IPO 1 leash ONLY to the judge. After that the next time the leash goes on is when the judge says so before the critique (Ob and Protection).
IPO 2 and 3 no leash up to the judge. Leash only when judge says so after routine (in Protection) and and before the critique in Ob. 

New rules (IGP) are a bit different for Bh (less heeling) and IPO 1 there is more leash handling in protection (mostly for those who lack control _I think)_. IGP goes into effect Jan 1.. and there is going to be a learning curve. 

IPO 2 and 3 are pretty much the same. 

We use OTHER secondary/conditioned reinforcers built into the pattern. Reward after the second gun shot (no gunshots in Bh), after an about turn, reward over the head and behind the dog for out of motion exercises (except for the sit out of motion which is the most blown exercise in IPO.. so I don't throw the ball ever.. I come back to basic (heel position) and then pay the dog in the sit.. so far it has prevented hydraulic sitting in training.. but the dog is young and untitled and I have plenty of time to teach him to do the incorrect slow sit Haha) after saying "thank you group" and so forth. The dog expects rewards at those things but not always so we are into the intermittent reward that can build a better and more consistent response. 

I have used a conditioned reinforcer in AKC ob a long time ago getting a CD. In spite of many things I did well in AKC ob. The biggest difference in that venue is that you can engage the dog between exercises such as having the dog jump up and touch your hand etc. Cannot do that in IPO or IGP.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

LittleFr0g said:


> Very well said, Becky. Also, what do you do if the dog is so incredibly fearful that it simply isn't CAPABLE of focusing on learning anything, let alone herding?
> 
> Also, cattle? Really? You would take a severely fearful dog and put it on cattle, not broke sheep? Really?


No I would not. That is like putting a puppy on a decoy with a sleeve. You start somewhere much lower. 

Of course if the dog is too afraid to work on a farm and that is what you got the dog for then that is a problem. Herding is about the livestock and not about the dog which is a tool. The livestock are your living. The dog is a means to handle those animals. It is all about business. 

I was dealing with dairy cattle and they are very different from beef breeds. I did not have sheep (or poultry). Cows won't graze after sheep and sheep did not make enough money. Nor did poultry. Those things were just "more work" and I had enough work to do.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

CptJack said:


> That's great. What do you do when they're not a herding breed, has no herding instinct/ability, is not owned by someone with livestock or all of the above? What if it's a, I don't know, a pomeranian in an apartment in NYC? That *isn't* a bite risk, naturally, since those are all dead and you won't bother (pro tip: You can advise what you want, but there are still people out there working successfully with those dogs because they have, get this, skills and experience you don't have!)
> 
> (PS: A truly fearful, soft, dog would never be allowed to continue in IPO by any handler worth their salt. ONe lacking confidence, yes, but not a super soft one who doesn't handle pressure OR a truly fearful one. Doing so creates a liability, but speaking of bite risk-)
> 
> ...


You know.. there was a fellow who was discussing a biting dog on here a few posts down. Someone immediately suggested putting the dog on meds. REALLY????? I guess that is our society these days speaking. 

Then they fellow put up a video. The dog is a 6 months old puppy and the video showed how the person interacting with the dog was literally inviting the dog (puppy) to bite. The lack of clarity put the dog in no man's land and so many suggestions were made (including books and video links). I hope they get those and figure it out because the dog was a super nice dog. Just nice. 

If a dog is soft, then of course it is not a candidate for IPO. I found that with my show dog but at the very least I was smart enough to find a decoy who would try to bring it out of her if it was there. He actually worked a Bichon. Successfully brought things out of dogs that no one thought was there. In the end my show dog might have titled. She was conflicted and soft and worried but wanted to work in spite of all that because I had a great decoy. _This is rare._ I learned a lot from that dog. 

In the end everyone thought I would "just get rid of her." That included her breeder. WHAT??? She was a fine house dog (but I put her up when guests come). Then she took care of my elderly Mother for over two years when Mom came to live with me. She knew Mom was old and not strong physically. This dog recognized Mom as weaker than her and when anyone came she quietly and without fanfare simply inserted herself between "whoever" and my Mother until Mom OK'd the person. Then she lay quietly and kept watch. 

If it is really fearful and a true bite risk or is just living an unhappy existence due to fear Euth is perhaps the best answer. It is not the only answer. People get dogs like this and love them and try anyway. If they have the resources and are up for what may be a very expensive and frustrating journey they are welcome to it. However, once the dog has bitten _in my opinion (no one need agree)_ that dog is all done. Dog bites are a problem. Mostly I think a people problem but I digress. I hate to see it happen because every bite impacts me and you and every dog owner in the form breed bans, insurance breed bans, insurance rates and the list goes on. 



CptJack said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjadwIRkE7o
> 
> ^INCREDIBLY fear aggressive (well, formerly) dog who lost her mind at everything. The mistakes in those runs are handling errors - like me pulling her off an obstacle (first and last run) and me being IN FRONT OF what I need her to take and pushing her off it (middle run).
> 
> ...


I want to look at those videos and reply. I know very little about agility so I won't tell you how to train an agility dog. Ha! I do steal things from agility trainers (although I tell them they get their ideas from IPO trainers.. I am just teasing so don't get riled up). 

Contacts for the scaling wall are really important and we all train it even tho when the dog is in drive and the wall is steep at competition height a lot of dogs forget everything and leap straight off the top of the wall to the ground landing four footed flat (risking injury) to get the dumbbell in a trial setting. My answer to that is to try to toss the DB up high and have it land near the bottom of the wall but not too close. Even that sometimes does not work. I have also seen many agility dogs (I watch) blow contacts in the speed and excitement of a trial. 

Anyway, let me try to look at these later. 



CptJack said:


> I strongly believe that this person doesn't know what a conditioned reinforcer is, frankly.


I do.. we are just very limited in a trial so we try to use the obedience phase of the trial picture itself (and those patterned locations) as noted above.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

3GSD4IPO said:


> No I would not. That is like putting a puppy on a decoy with a sleeve. You start somewhere much lower.
> 
> Of course if the dog is too afraid to work on a farm and that is what you got the dog for then that is a problem. Herding is about the livestock and not about the dog which is a tool. The livestock are your living. The dog is a means to handle those animals. It is all about business.
> 
> I was dealing with dairy cattle and they are very different from beef breeds. I did not have sheep (or poultry). Cows won't graze after sheep and sheep did not make enough money. Nor did poultry. Those things were just "more work" and I had enough work to do.


You LITERALLY said that your solution to a fearful BC would be to teach it to herd cattle. You don't get to change your answer now just because you got called out on it.


> "What would you have done faced with a lacking confidence, incredibly fearful, incredibly SOFT/sensitive border collie? Gotten another dog, probably. That makes your experience and advice limited in applicability and your experience, yeah, limited."
> I would have asked to learn how to get the dog to herd cattle and use it's "eye."


I'd also really love for you to show where CptJack specified that the BC was purchased specifically to herd on a farm. Because she didn't.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Also, this is going to be shocking to some people, but.

Not all border collies have ANY herding instinct at ALL, much less 'eye' (which is one herding style, not the only one they use). they are being bred for other things and as that happens working ability and instinct vanishes. More BC in sports and pet homes have *zero* working ability than have some, much less a lot.

SO THEN WHAT?

EVEN IF WE IGNORE THE STUPIDITY of starting a fearful dog on freaking CATTLE, WHAT IF IT HAS NO INNATE ABILITY TO HERD? WHAT THEN?

*ETA:* Re: Eye:

Eye doesn't work on cattle. It just - it doesn't. Not all BC's are stylish workers (crouching and using eye); some work very upright and loose eyed. The BC from cattle lines are mostly this sort because eye doesn't really work on cows. Eye is great on sheep, because they're fairly 'light' (move easily and quickly with little force or pressure from the dog - ie: easily intimidate). Cattle are not light. Cattle are 'heavy'. They don't move easily. They are not 'pressure' sensitive and are often confrontational. They require a dog with more 'oomph' and usually a willingness to get in and grip. BC can ABSOLUTELY do this, but they're not moving cattle through freaking lying down and staring intimidatingly at them (which is all eye is), unless you have the most dog broke cows who have ever existed on the planet, who also have no calves and are maybe grazing in a pot field.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

Maybe we should take a step back. 
Your discussion CHOSE the "fearful Border Collie" for me. Honestly, I had a farm. I would not have gotten such a dog. If I was blessed with this dog I would have tried to see if it had herding instinct. If not, then (of course) it would not be used for herding. I am very aware that a LOT of BC's do not have herding instinct. The ABCA (I think) wants to keep the BC a working dog so they were refusing to register or recognize an BC that was in the AKC show ring. That might have changed. It's been awhile since I was involved. 

On a farm (which is the only place I would have considered this breed) the most important thing is making money. It is a business. I doubt I would have chosen such a dog. Cpt. Jack chose that dog for me then I was asked what I would do. 

As a farmer I had a job to do. It was about the money. It was about the work. I am no longer farming but the lesson remains. Expenditure must be profitable in returns (be it energy, money or effort). 

Yes. Cattle are hard. Much harder than sheep (tho sheep unexposed to dogs can be very hard too!). 
Here is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_3VO_B-O5s
Don't tell me "eye" does not work on cattle. Eye certainly worked on these yearlings. Are there dogs with more of less "eye?" Yes. There are just like there are dogs with more or less drive or nerve or brains or nose. Everything on a spectrum. 

And this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEFvBIKNG5U

I cannot find it quickly but there is a fellow (Canada??) who routinely uses BC's to handle cattle. When I asked why that choice and not Australian Cattle dogs, he said he preferred a dog that could think as it was less stressful on the stock. 

Whatever. Let's just put it to rest. You all think I am unknowledgeable, incompetent and abusive to dogs because I use Positive Punishment as necessary. Out of just being tired of a defensive stance and lots of misunderstood typing I will just agree and let it go at that. Believe what you want and if it is that I am stupid and incompetent then that is fine. 

I did want to look at those Videos Cpt Jack. It won't be today. Maybe tomorrow night. 

One last thing. I have a job I do (sadly no longer farming but it pays the bills). I do not train dogs for people. I don't hold classes and I surely don't have a "board and train" facility. I have no desire to do those things. I just put up a 26X30 building. Every I train with was like "Ooooh! Training building! When are you going to offer classes?" No. I won't accept the liability and most assuredly I don't want to deal with the people. 

Have a good day. Wishing you both continued successes.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> Your discussion CHOSE the "fearful Border Collie" for me. Honestly, I had a farm. I would not have gotten such a dog. If I was blessed with this dog I would have tried to see if it had herding instinct. If not, then (of course) it would not be used for herding. I am very aware that a LOT of BC's do not have herding instinct. The ABCA (I think) wants to keep the BC a working dog so they were refusing to register or recognize an BC that was in the AKC show ring. That might have changed. It's been awhile since I was involved.


Yes, but shocking factoid, not all, or even MOST Border Collies are used for herding these days. Can learning to herd help build confidence in a fearful BC? Of course it can, but giving that as the first and ONLY solution, with zero mention of any sort of evaluation of the dog, whether it might in fact need medication first if it's fearfulness is severe enough that it isn't capable of learning anything without help, and zero mention of any other solutions, along with the frankly ludicrous suggestion that you would put a fearful dog on CATTLE, is what people are saying points to your inexperience here. Well, this along with a great many other things you've said in this and other threads. And just because SOME BCs can work cattle does not mean they all can or that it's even common to use them. That's just common sense, really.

Seriously, I've already said that you have the POTENTIAL to be a really valuable asset to this forum, but only if you are ready and willing to admit that there is a GREAT deal that you don't know, that you are extremely experienced in one area, but vastly under-experienced in many others, and start LISTENING to the people who ARE experienced in those areas, and stop trying to give advice on them until you have learned more. There's NO shame in admitting you don't know something. And people here will respect you far more if you do.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

*Re: First time Border Collie owner*

Sure. 

It's a thing.

There are whole lines of BC bred for cattle. Who mostly don't use eye - or at least it they have eye its incidental to the process - and are different from most BC, who work lighter stock (like sheep - or even ducks and geese) and doesn't really address the fact that:
a-) Cattle is a stupid plan for a fearful dog, or one who lacks confience an power and will ruin them for future work b-) if hey have any instinct at all, which many do not, regardless of stock, or c-) apply to anyone not living on a freaking farm.

So, you know, irrelevant to 95% of people with these issues and dogs period.

(PS: I've seen a half dozen people doing 'herding' with poodles, so.... I mean.)

Seriously. When you are you going to learn it's better to admit you don't know everything than to open your mouth, dig in and prove you know almost nothing?


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

*Re: First time Border Collie owner*



3GSD4IPO said:


> We use OTHER secondary/conditioned reinforcers built into the pattern.


 You're missing the opportunities to capitalize on what I proposed in theory. Especially considering this : 


> I do.. *we are just very limited in a trial* so we try to use the obedience phase of the trial picture itself (and those patterned locations) as noted above.



I dunno. I guess maybe the concept is beyond the IPO crowd in general, since you and your training peers don't seem as though you embrace that chance. I know I definitely would. Either that, or you simply don't even realize the chance is there. Nonetheless, my point was - a "clicker" CAN be AND IS taken into the ring or onto the field, and COULD be used as a secondary reinforcer twice during each routine / level. And again, used "legally".


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

*Re: First time Border Collie owner*



> You all think I am unknowledgeable, incompetent and abusive to dogs because I use Positive Punishment as necessary.


I missed this. This is just patently ridiculous and you know it. CptJack herself has said repeatedly in this very thread that she doesn't believe that. You can either engage honestly in this discussion, even if it means acknowledging some uncomfortable truths, or you can walk away, either choice is perfectly valid. But making false claims to try to make yourself feel better and portray yourself as a victim is both disingenuous and frankly insulting.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

*Re: First time Border Collie owner*

Want me to quote all the times I said I didn't believe that in this convo? Aw, heck, who cares? I've got some time, why not?



> I use them with some of my dogs, sometimes. I don't use them ever or at all with others. Depends on a whole lot of things but bottom line is 'if the dog finds them useful, yes, if the dog finds them distressing, no.'





> whether you use NRM or not (I don't care)





> he methods that people use in training their dog has nothing to do with whether we get along or not. Some of them use prongs or e-collars or whatever.





> I don't care if you you no reward markers for the record


Between that, and in those posts even, even after all the somewhat infuriating history, I made an attempt to give you info you could use and that would help your ability to shape. So did others.

Never mind other threads where I talk about using e-collars (I have), Prongs (I have), and IPO an balanced trainers I respect and like just fine.

The problem isn't method. I don't use those methods but I in no way think they are abusive. 

I DO think you are ignorant and more determined to be 'right' than to learn anything. *THAT* I have a problem with. *THAT* is frankly frustrating as crap. i'm sure you know stuff - about IPO, and GSDs, and even using prongs and corrections appropriately/for corrections outside maybe 2 scenarios (2 scenarios are all I've got with that one). That doesn't mean you know EVERYTHING and your unwillingness to stop puffing up to be *right* (in your mind) and defend yourself, you are deliberately dismissing good information, given by people who DO know. 

THAT? is what I have a problem with. 

You don't know everything. That's okay. That you REFUSE to be wrong or even stop presenting yourself as an authority about things you *DON"T* know about, and know you don't know about is not. 

So no. I don't think you're abusive, and I don't think you know nothing. I think you're insecure, defensive, and also attempting to be arrogant and feed your ego and view of yourself as an expert, and in doing so are dispensing bad to dangerous advice and you will be well advised to be a little less determined to be right and a little more willing to LISTEN TO PEOPLE.


----------



## DaySleepers (Apr 9, 2011)

*Re: First time Border Collie owner*

I of course can't speak for everyone, 3GSD, but seriously. Go back and look at this post.

You post something about how no reward markers work for you, fine. You did make it sound like it was an amazing idea everyone should try, and also included an article that implies that not using NRMs could _kill your dog._ People - reasonably, in my opinion, object to this on various levels, citing their own dogs shutting down from the use of NRMs as proof. Instead of taking their statements as new information to consider, you assume they don't know what you mean by NRM and instead assume everyone thinks a NRM is screaming, yanking, or hitting the dog. You get defensive about how you're not doing these things (nobody, as far as I could tell, thought you were). 

When it's finally clear that yes, they know what NRM means and no, they still don't agree with you/your article, you backpedal and say how well of course you have to adapt training protocols to the dog, and bring up dogs who react poorly to clicker sounds or effusive praise and excitement. As if using a non-traditional reward marker for dogs with noise sensitivities is the EXACT same as not being able to use a NRM at all because the _whole purpose of the marker_ is excessively punishing to that particular dog.

Your threads often follow this pattern; you make bold, broad statements that are clearly only true for some fraction of the dog population. People who bring up counterpoints or objections are wildly misunderstood, or you move the goalposts, or you jump on something else they said to nitpick while ignoring their main point, or you backpedal to make yourself look 'right'. Often all of the above, if the thread goes on long enough. That's not healthy, educational debate, and frankly makes you look bad. When you first showed up I actually had a lot of respect for you for being clear about how corrections should only be used once a dog understands commands and the like (IE actually being a balanced trainer, not yank-and-crank saying you're 'balanced' because you pet the dog sometimes), but your attitude here has quickly eroded that. I do NOT, for the record, now think that you abuse your dogs and are an evil person and terrible trainer, or even that you're always wrong, but I do think you're full of yourself and unwilling to learn or engage on a mature level.

Oh, and I use NRMs too. I try not to in formal training sessions, but that's because I know that it can be a bad habit and hard to break if I do wind up owning or working with a dog who's sensitive to being told they're wrong.

I don't know why I'm writing this. Maybe because I hope you'll take a good look at the way your writing and attitude comes off and actually take steps to change it. To be more open to listening to and learning from experiences that aren't yours. To be a really great resource to a forum that's largely pet dog owners - and some sports people - because yeah, sometimes we need to see things from a different angle. None of us are always going to be right, but for goodness' sake, it's okay to say "I didn't think of that, you have a point" or "oh, I guess there are some circumstances this wouldn't work in" or just "whoops I messed up there, sorry."


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

*Re: First time Border Collie owner*

op2:op2:op2:


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 15, 2017)

I'm staying out of this but can someone please outline what kind of dog would suffer from what everyone is calling a negative marker? I've only owned one really soft dog but she was fine with the whole negative marker thing. I'm trying to picture the kind of dog that would suffer from this. Just curious.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Well I wouldn't use the word "suffer" but my Dutchie is a good example. Very high drive, eager to please, and pretty sharp. You could 'hit him' however you want and he'll love you more for it. But if I'm in the middle of a training session and he makes a mistake (ex. sit instead of down) and I say "no" or "hey" or whatever it is that indicates "you are wrong". No yelling, no physical pressure.... His tail will drop and he will just lie there or go to his crate. He'll be more squirrely for the rest of the training session and shut down very quickly. Now, his recovery is great. All I need to do is slap him around a few times and he'll be back up to speed  But I do not use NRM (no reward markers) in my training. If my dog is not doing something I want, I change my training to help him succeed.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

https://www.clickertraining.com/node/2848

https://susangarrettdogagility.com/2011/03/lessons-in-frustration-recovery-and-nrms/


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> I'm staying out of this but can someone please outline what kind of dog would suffer from what everyone is calling a negative marker? I've only owned one really soft dog but she was fine with the whole negative marker thing. I'm trying to picture the kind of dog that would suffer from this. Just curious.


CptJack has already done this earlier in the thread, she has/had several dogs who respond very negatively to negative markers.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 15, 2017)

Havent read the articles yet. Again out of curiosity, if given a NRM Beau will just offer up some other behavior. More than say three or four times of this he'll get a bit of an attitude ie bark at me or possibly put his teeth on my leg but his overall happy enthusiastic demeanor doesn't change and he'll still stay there and keep working with me- so for those of you more experienced what does this say about my dog?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> I'm staying out of this but can someone please outline what kind of dog would suffer from what everyone is calling a negative marker? I've only owned one really soft dog but she was fine with the whole negative marker thing. I'm trying to picture the kind of dog that would suffer from this. Just curious.












Kylie is the first dog I tried to train from ground up with no *intentional*, physical corrections and tried to be all rewards based with (emphasis on try and intentional). She's always been lacking confidence *and* pretty low drive, but I made some mistakes (per petpeeve's links). Namely: I lured, a lot. I did not reward offered behavior or attempts. I micromanaged big time, and, mostly, I used NRM during the 'value building' stage of the behavior (look at the Susan G post) without sufficiently making sure she understood. 

To the end result of her responding to a NRM for a very long time was basically a signal that she was wrongity wrong wrong and a blaring buzzer. TRYING had no value to her - she could do nothing, waiting to have it be made a 'sure thing' via being lured or having the right behavior made very obvious - or she could make an attempt, risk hearing 'nope' and not get a treat. 

Cleaning up my training, building value into effort and behavior early on made a big difference. At this point she hears a nope and she basically spins around to reset for the last thing she did and tries again - as to my other dogs. Because it's ONLY used for VERY known behavior with rich reward history, and it means (again as per link) that reinforcement is close just - give it another go with a little more effort. 

So basically I do use them - as I mentioned somewhere else, you can see me using one when Kiran misses his weave entry in the second run in that video - but. Sure as heck I don't use them in shaping sessions of new behavior! I also don't use them often, even with the more resilient dogs, but even less than 'not all that often' for Kylie. Kylie, honestly, if things are going south I will use ONE NRM. If that gets me a reset and behavior, awesome, we carry on with reward (either the rest of the agility course or food, depending). I won't, ever, use two in a row. If she misses time two I pick her up, give her a cuddle let her wiggle at me and reassess what I need to do to make her successful. Because 2? Too much for her. 

The other dogs, whose mistakes are primarily 'going too fast/not thinking' because arousal, I might give 2 to, in a relative row. They don't get 3 attempts. After 2 it's sit, stay, look at me, deep breath. "Ok" and that works about 98% of the time. If it doesn't? Throw a ball, stop training, figure out what I have to change here that a known behavior (or I thought known) isn't happening. They don't shut down, but they go get frustrated and that isn't conducive to learning.

*ETA:* and those links taught me a thing or two. Like WHY ad HOW I was screwing up with Kylie. I'm glad they were posted.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Havent read the articles yet. Again out of curiosity, if given a NRM Beau will just offer up some other behavior. More than say three or four times of this he'll get a bit of an attitude ie bark at me or possibly put his teeth on my leg but his overall happy enthusiastic demeanor doesn't change and he'll still stay there and keep working with me- so for those of you more experienced what does this say about my dog?


It says he's a dog who has fairly high drive/value for working with you/training with you or what you have as a reward and is a tenacious sucker.

Though, for all this describes Molly and Kiran - I avoid it where I can. See also 'two attempts, then we stop and you look at me, engage your brain and try again, and if that fails I'm breaking until I can stop'. Frustrated dogs don't (IME) learn very well, anyway and I don't want a conditioned emotional response of FRUSTRATION, you know?


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 15, 2017)

Will read the articles when can sit down and actually think about them. I read Cptnjacks posts, I was thinking this was about soft dogs/lacking confidence etc, so thought I'd ask. Lol but then Canyx's dog doesnt sound like the other examples here...... So I gather its not necessarily a confidence/ lack of or hard/soft dog thing. Interesting.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Will read the articles when can sit down and actually think about them. I read Cptnjacks posts, I was thinking this was about soft dogs/lacking confidence etc, so thought I'd ask. Lol but then Canyx's dog doesnt sound like the other examples here...... So I gather its not necessarily a confidence/ lack of or hard/soft dog thing. Interesting.


I honestly think some dogs just... opt out. "I'm not getting it right, there is no reward for me in this, I'm out." Which may be over-humanizing the dogs, but it's certainly a mindset I identify with


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

CptJack said:


> I honestly think some dogs just... opt out. "I'm not getting it right, there is no reward for me in this, I'm out." Which may be over-humanizing the dogs, but it's certainly a mindset I identify with


This would be Kuma to a t. He is very confident, but he has an extremely low threshold for frustration.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

LittleFr0g said:


> This would be Kuma to a t. He is very confident, but he has an extremely low threshold for frustration.


Yeah. 

Random bit of a side-story. 

I used to say Kiran had a low threshold tolerance. Someone had to explain to me that those words meant threshold for BEING frustrated; Ie they didn't do frustration. Not that the dog was easily frustrated. 

I felt kind of dumb that day.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

CptJack said:


> Yeah.
> 
> Random bit of a side-story.
> 
> ...


No need to feel dumb about that, seems like a very easy and common mistake to make to me.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

@Dexter
I would say Brae is hard in some ways and soft (for me only) in others. But that in itself shows how things are not black and white. And as I've mentioned in past posts... This same dog could happily do 45 minute training sessions as a 16 week old puppy, and never gives up when shaping. He was more 'into' training than the other trainer's herding dog at the same age. So he handles frustration, and at times lack of feedback, extremely well. But he 'feels it' when I am displeased. I took that information and I decided to change how I train. It is what it is. 

My rottie/retriever Soro you could "nope nope nope" at all day and it would roll off his back like water. I used NRMs with him. I think I could have done an equally good job without having used them too, if I could turn back the clock.

As it is with life and training, actions (how you train) speak louder than words.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Also, the other thing for me is I train very differently now compared to 10+ years ago. I was very frustrated a lot and so Soro in some ways became desensitized to resets, corrections, NRMs, my tone, etc. There are very few mistakes in my training with Brae so a reset, NRM, correction, etc. stands out way more for him. With my partner, who 'talks more' and repeats more in training, Brae can hear stern tones and NRMs all day and still be peppy.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Kiran and Brae continue to crack me up in similarities.

I call Kiran soft all the time - and to a large degree, he is. To me. 

I let a lot of other people work with him. He gives absolutely no craps about them or their pleasure. It's hysterical to me to listen to people call him 'hard', because. ...no? You're just not his person. He cares about your reward.

OTOH, people also mistake him: 
a-) Bouncing off them because he's aroused/wants the toy their holding
or
b-) not being concerned at all

to think he's super social. 

He's not. 

He's toy driven and stable, but I promise he responds to the toy without a person at the other end and trees much the same way he's responding to you. I let them keep that though because I like when people like him.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Yep, still two peas in a pod it seems 

Brae is very social and seeks petting/attention from people... IF there is absolutely nothing better going on. Like during my week one orientation I let him schmooze with people and he loves it. He'll trill and whine with whole butt wag as he jams his nose into their hands. But the moment a toy comes out, they totally cease to exist. I purposely don't bring toys to most orientations because of this.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Kiran's similar, (erm, I know I literally just said that) but maybe a touch more aloof. He doesn't seem to find attention from people who aren't me rewarding, but he'll take it if that's all that's on offer *and* I am still present. They're better than nothing (but not an absence of me). 

If I TELL HIM to work with someone, am still present and they have reinforcement he wants - fine. If all of those things are not true (or I've left the area) he lays down with his back to them and they cease to exist. Like toys, food, whatever, in his face - on leash, off leash, doesn't matter, you're not there to him. Happens to my HUSBAND fairly frequently, even. I find that hysterical, but I am a terrible person. 

OTOH, if he wants the reward and I'm there and they're competent he's pretty good. If they're not he just barks at them until they give up and throw the food/toy at him. 

He does, however, unreservedly love children. A LOT.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Kiran sounds sooo lovely  And of course, you've done a great job with him!

I think I just lucked out with Brae and/or his breeder did a great job matching. His cousins and other dogs from the breeder run the spectrum of super lovey and social to like... the dog who is normally social but put a level 3 bite on a dog sitter he KNEW because she grabbed his collar to move him inside... or the dog who flat out won't let other people touch her. But my breeder knew I wanted a dog that was at least okay around people because of classes and such.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

LittleFr0g said:


> Seriously, I've already said that you have the POTENTIAL to be a really valuable asset to this forum, but only if you are ready and willing to admit that there is a GREAT deal that you don't know, that you are extremely experienced in one area, but vastly under-experienced in many others, and start LISTENING to the people who ARE experienced in those areas, and stop trying to give advice on them until you have learned more. There's NO shame in admitting you don't know something. And people here will respect you far more if you do.


I have a feeling the OP has possibly left the building. Which would be unfortunate really, because I wholeheartedly agree with LittleFrOg's suggestion. 

I guess it remains to be seen whether they return or not. Not sure if it the case here but IMO they shouldn't go away all butt-hurt. Simply make a few tweaks to the attitude, realize that bad and /or inappropriate advice does sometimes exist, be more sensitive and aware of that fact, understand that there is ALWAYS room for self-improvement, and just move forward on the path of contribution albeit more delicately and thoughtfully. 

Humbling. Such is the nature of dog training, itself. Right?


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> I have a feeling the OP has possibly left the building. Which would be unfortunate really, because I wholeheartedly agree with LittleFrOg's suggestion.
> 
> I guess it remains to be seen whether they return or not. Not sure if it the case here but IMO they shouldn't go away all butt-hurt. Simply make a few tweaks to the attitude, realize that bad and /or inappropriate advice does sometimes exist, be more sensitive and aware of that fact, understand that there is ALWAYS room for self-improvement, and just move forward on the path of contribution albeit more delicately and thoughtfully.
> 
> Humbling. Such is the nature of dog training, itself. Right?


Have left this thread, not the building. 
I just am tired of having to type every little step of what I would do (like the soft and fearful Border collie). OF COURSE I would not be so mean and heartless as to IMMEDIATELY put such a dog on cattle. OF COURSE there would be many steps in between. I just jumped to the end as opposed to discussing in a book the steps in between. 

And last (but not least) OF COURSE I do not know "everything" and my dog proves that to me. Oh yes. 

The thread simply went completely OT (I thought there was a rule about that, but I am not a Mod.. and a Mod is on this thread). I simply have found it useful to include a NRM (which I called a negative marker) when shaping a behavior. With this dog. It was just food for thought. Not that anyone HAS to do it. 

Just like no one HAS to get an e collar or a prong and I would not suggest either is appropriate in the hands of most pet owning people (and, dare I say, most of the competitive agility and competitive obedience people I see). 

So, yes. I walked away from the thread which went wildly OT and ended up a discussion about personal dogs between friends (I have nothing against any of that it just no longer interested me). 

I did look at the videos BTW. Just did not comment for reasons stated above.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> I did look at the videos BTW. Just did not comment for reasons stated above.


Did you look at the LINKS that I posted? Those links DO happen to be on-topic, completely, and are very informative. Particularly the one from a KPA faculty member. I'm curious to know your opinion of what she wrote, and whether you will have a different standpoint on NRMs now.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> The thread simply went completely OT (I thought there was a rule about that, but I am not a Mod.. and a Mod is on this thread). I simply have found it useful to include a NRM (which I called a negative marker) when shaping a behavior. With this dog. It was just food for thought. Not that anyone HAS to do it.


You're right, that is for a mod to decide, it has not gone off topic, it has evolved, as threads tend to do. This comment you made though? THAT is what we consider backseat moderating here, and that IS against forum rules. I am feeling generous this morning though, so I will give you a warning instead of the temp ban we typically hand out. 

And FYI, if you do not wish to be misunderstood, than yes, you do need to type out the full method you would use. People here can only judge you on what you type out. Only typing out the end step and expecting people to somehow just KNOW what you would do prior to that is never going to end well for you.


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

LittleFr0g said:


> You're right, that is for a mod to decide, it has not gone off topic, it has evolved, as threads tend to do. This comment you made though? THAT is what we consider backseat moderating here, and that IS against forum rules. I am feeling generous this morning though, so I will give you a warning instead of the temp ban we typically hand out.
> 
> And FYI, if you do not wish to be misunderstood, than yes, you do need to type out the full method you would use. People here can only judge you on what you type out. Only typing out the end step and expecting people to somehow just KNOW what you would do prior to that is never going to end well for you.


Thank you. 
I am always glad I turned down every Moderator request I have gotten on forums. It is not an easy job.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> So, yes. I walked away from the thread which went wildly OT and ended up a discussion about personal dogs between friends (I have nothing against any of that it just no longer interested me).


I did my best to get things back on topic, respectfully and earnestly all the while, and yet you ignored my latest attempt at re-engaging you. Directly, and from all appearances -deliberately, ignored me. 

In light of that, I gather you find the original discussion no longer interesting as well. You know. The one that YOU initiated.

*shrug*


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

3GSD4IPO said:


> Thank you.
> I am always glad I turned down every Moderator request I have gotten on forums. It is not an easy job.


Really? I've never found it to be particularly difficult. Perhaps some people are simply more naturally suited to it than others? Who knows?


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> I did my best to get things back on topic, respectfully and earnestly all the while, and yet you ignored my latest attempt at re-engaging you. Directly, and from all appearances -deliberately, ignored me.
> 
> In light of that, I gather you find the original discussion no longer interesting as well. You know. The one that YOU initiated.
> 
> *shrug*


No no.. that is not the case at all. I am not deliberately ignoring you. 

Sometimes I just don't get to everything (including Dog Forums) and this thread has a lot in it. 

I just have a very busy schedule. I work one job FT and have a LOT to do at my house (I heat mostly with wood, I do all my own work with the house and I have a tractor I am working on and another tractor I may be getting in to work on). I had land cleared and now have stumps to cut down.. Oh the list is endless and it doesn't get done if I do not do it since there is only one person here. Two days a week are entirely dog training. I also help my Brother in his business 1 night a week after work. 

I will get home after work and think I am going to get XYZ done and suddenly it is late, only X is partly done and if I am going to function at work the next day I have to stop and sleep. Haha Y and Z are still there to do waiting... 

I will get to it. Thank you for understanding.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

3GSD4IPO said:


> No no.. that is not the case at all. I am not deliberately ignoring you.
> 
> Sometimes I just don't get to everything (including Dog Forums) and this thread has a lot in it.
> 
> ...


You realize mods can still see you and your forum activity even if you set your status to invisible, right?


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

Yes.
10 char


----------



## 3GSD4IPO (Jun 8, 2016)

petpeeve said:


> https://www.clickertraining.com/node/2848


I have been to this site a few times. It wants me to download a newer version of a flash player and I have said "OK" to that more than once. Nope. Which is frustrating because the night before last (I think, Little Frog is watching so she can tell you) I got it to download and then the phone rang and that situation was more important. I signed off (GAAAHH!!!) and now cannot get the page to reload. (I keep getting a NRM! Haha!). 

FWIW I am familiar with Karen Pryor. I use some of what she does to teach my dog new things. I have used 100 things to do with a box quite a lot. Fun for the dog and for me and it tires the dog out. 



> https://susangarrettdogagility.com/2011/03/lessons-in-frustration-recovery-and-nrms/


I looked at this. I know Susan Garrett and do not buy into all she does. Some is good. 

In this video she changes her voice for a different dog in the room for barking. I would not have done that with this particular puppy. I see her practically begging that puppy to engage. I am not seeing the puppy shutting down in reaction to her.. I see a puppy that is pretty low drive (or tired??) to begin with.. or just plain too young. He (she?) engages and then, typical of a puppy with not a lot of drive (yet) the puppy disengages. I hate to judge a puppy this age. At least I would hate to be too critical based on this video. 

I see her practically begging this puppy to be in the game. 

In the text portion of the link she says this: "To my dogs a NRM means “you are very close to earning a reinforcement, try something different.” THAT was what I was trying to convey at the outset of my post. 

This is another gem from the text:
"_A dog’s response to failure is entirely learned. Dogs that shut down are taught to shut down. It is the history of what happens after the shut down that rewards the dog for the act of giving up._"

I cannot agree with this more. We have had dogs "quit" and have had people "put them up." This has rewarded quitting. You cannot reward quitting. 

Case in point: My young dog lost a ball in a brush pile (I tossed it there very accidentally). He searched and could not find it and he quit. I said nothing at all and I started to take him in.. NOT to his outdoor kennel (he loves being out there) but inside (which at the time meant the indoor kennel which is secure and large but sort of boring because it is not outside). This was not rewarding. He suddenly stopped, looked at me and took off with purpose and went back to the brush pile and searched until he found the ball. For this he was heavily rewarded with play and a game of two ball (and was put up outside). He was around 14 months old. 

He has never offered to quit again. I won't fool myself and think he would not, but as he matures and his drives become more evident I am pretty confident he won't quit or shut down. 

I have seen dogs taken off the field for quitting and put in the truck in their crate. A safe place. I can tell you that I have also seen those same dogs quit and go back to the truck.. self rewarding.. leave the field and the handler.. whenever the going got tough or confusing or hard. 

Since _details_ seem to be exceedingly important I will elaborate on my use of the NRM. My dog clearly "gets" the clicker game. I can shape (teach) a behavior I want.. some go faster than others. It can depend on HIS desire to do something as well as mine to teach it. Just like us, I believe that there are tasks a dog simply likes better and tasks the dog does not like as much. One is easier to teach than the other. I have had good solid success in taking a behavior the dog does NOT like as much and conditioning the response so that behavior can become the dog's favorite thing to do or one of the favorites. It takes a bit of perseverance and (sometimes) a really hungry dog and really good rewards (food). 

One of the things you can do in a "clicker responsive" dog it to try the click and reward for each new behavior offered. One dog I had was stellar at this. She picked up immediately that she was to do new things. I was doing this with the current dog.. and "nope" as a NRM simply helped him. That is all. Nothing more. That was IT. 

Now I am being called away again.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> I have been to this site a few times. It wants me to download a newer version of a flash player and I have said "OK" to that more than once. Nope.


You can easily click on "cancel" to decline the download. It's not necessary in order to view the article. Just in case cancelling doesn't work for you, here is a copy and paste of it. I'm still interested in your opinion on this one, specifically. 



*********

What is a No Reward Marker (NRM), and is it a useful tool or an awful mistake?

Should a good clicker trainer use an NRM, and, if so, when?

It’s out there, lurking. At times you feel it stalking just behind you. At last it springs as someone asks, “Why don’t you tell your dog it was wrong?”


The NRM debate has been reopened once more.

The debate arises in cycles, but next time you’ll be prepared for it, no matter how stealthily it creeps.

What is an NRM, anyway?
On the surface, an NRM is rather straightforward. At times, though, there is considerable debate regarding its true nature. The No Reward Marker is usually described as “conditioned extinction,” as its intention is to inform the learner that no reinforcement awaits down the path he is considering. One of the most well-known examples of NRM is the children’s game Hot & Cold, where feedback of “getting warmer” guides the participant to a goal object, while “colder” indicates that the participant should try another route.

At first glance, this looks like a good use of continuous feedback. However, a closer examination reveals that the “cold” feedback is really unnecessary. Savvy players start by spinning until they hear “hot;” they do not waste their time passing through the room experimenting with how many “cold” responses they can get. In fact, the lack of a “hot” response is equivalent to a “cold” response, as anyone who has played a shaping game can attest. In the clicker trainer’s version of Hot & Cold, the feedback is click and no-click respectively. In both the children’s version and the clicker version, the cold answer—“cold” or no click—adds no further information.

Testing NRMs in humans

At a Shedd Aquarium training workshop, Ken Ramirez led us through a variety of training games to develop skills in timing, cuing, chaining, and more. After several days, he gave us a new challenge: train a human subject to perform three simple cued behaviors using both a conditioned reinforcer and an NRM. Our task would not be complete unless the three behaviors could be performed successfully—and the subject could recognize and define our NRM stimulus.

The results were amazing. Even though we had been discussing NRMs so recently and the concept was fresh in our minds (unlike the minds of our usual animal subjects), only one learner out of fifteen guessed that the extra stimulus was supposed to be useful data as an NRM.

Meanwhile, every learner exhibited frustration, and even occasional aggression (sometimes veiled as jokes and sometimes not). About half of the learners never completed the tasks in the allotted time, while they had been highly successful in the other games.

In my own learner, I saw cue inversion (frustration and confusion with the NRM caused confusion in other areas) and a general loss of enthusiasm. Even though I was making everything as plain and simple as possible—marking errors with the same precision as I would click correct responses, and trying to follow errors with a chance for success—I could see her attitude souring.

Yet as a group we’d done well. Ours was the first session in the years of Ken’s teaching where someone had not stormed out angrily during the NRM challenge.

This experience cemented my current opinion on the NRM. With this confusion and frustration in humans who already knew the NRM concept, why risk those feelings with those who cannot discuss it with us?

Conditioned extinction or aversive?
There is far more to the NRM debate than this, however. Stand back, as this is where I'll step on some toes…

By the time an NRM has real meaning for the learner, it has become positive punishment.

An NRM may cue extinction, but in doing so it also signals a loss of opportunity. The chance of earning reinforcement has closed. If the subject changes his behavior to avoid the NRM—and that is the whole point of its use—then the NRM is by definition an aversive. It may be a mild aversive or it may be severe, depending upon the learner’s mindset, but it is a stimulus the learner is actively working to avoid. Because the trainer introduces the NRM upon the learner’s mistake (adds an aversive stimulus that modifies behavior), the NRM is positive punishment.

Is the NRM necessarily evil? Probably not, but it's not the completely neutral stimulus that many claim. The punishment continuum runs from fairly mild to extremely harsh, and it is the learner who interprets the severity of any given punisher. If a trainer wishes to avoid the use of positive punishment, he should be aware of all its forms, including the form of an NRM.

Observe a contestant on a game show. When he answers a question and then hears the buzzer marking a wrong answer, does his body language indicate that the buzzer is a neutral stimulus, serving only as useful data? Certainly not! The disappointed contestant may exhibit slumping posture, frustrated displacement gestures, perhaps profanity—even if he does not lose points or money, only the opportunity to earn more of the same. For someone who really wants to be right, being wrong is quite aversive. (A learner who doesn’t care about being right is facing a motivation problem, not a data problem; an NRM won’t help and may even hinder the development of motivation.)

Broken contracts
Some trainers use NRMs not only to shape a new behavior, but to indicate any mistake a learner makes, including a failure to respond properly to a cue (no response or an incorrect response). For example, if a trainer sends a dog to select a scented object from a collection and the dog retrieves the wrong one, the trainer might say “oops” as the dog picks up the incorrect object.

While, superficially, this seems to be relevant data, it can break down careful training. Positively-trained cues are themselves tertiary reinforcers. An NRM after a failed cue breaks the contract of reinforcement, offering P+ after a tertiary reinforcer—and creates serious risk of poisoning the cue (and rendering it useless for future use in chains).

(Note: If you find yourself using an NRM after a cue, review the cue. Why isn't it working? The issue is probably not the NRM at all!)

Many animals (and humans) exhibiting stress in challenging conditions are stressed not only by the tasks they face, but by the changing schedules of reinforcement and the increased chance of punishment. Is the dog really finding scent discrimination so difficult—or is the dog frustrated by the learning conditions?

Is this data necessary?
Proponents argue that NRMs are simply data to inform the learner. They say that it’s not fair to leave a dog guessing; it’s kinder to tell him what’s not working.

Why tell the dog that he wasn't successful? This question is usually asked in a more philosophical way, but I mean it very practically—if the dog needs an NRM to realize that he isn't being reinforced, the trainer has screwed up badly. Why doesn't the dog know already? Clicker training is pretty much yes/no. If training has been set up so that the dog can't tell if he's been successful, and he needs supplemental information, then something is wrong! (See “Fixing behavior without an NRM” for more on this.)

Fixing Behaviors without an NRM

Training my dog Shakespeare the (admittedly silly) behavior of putting his head into a bucket for a shaping demo was going smoothly, until I inadvertently reinforced my paw-oriented dog for moving his paw as he dipped his head. Within seconds I had a dog convinced that I wanted his right paw in the bucket! While many trainers might have resorted to an NRM to discourage the paw behavior, I chose to repair the behavior using only good timing and careful placement of reinforcement.

You’ll see in the video how Shakespeare is frustrated by his low rate of success at first. Would his attitude have been improved if I’d told him that his behavior was incorrect? Would an NRM have helped him know exactly how to modify the behavior the way I wanted, or would the NRM have been associated with bucket interaction itself? To fix the behavior, I tightened up my timing and temporarily reduced criteria. With the resulting jump in rate of reinforcement, the learner was able to quickly grasp what I wanted and retain it. (Edits in the video are solely to save time as Shakespeare located and ate his treats.) You’ll see the superstitious paw movement persist and then fade under the weight of reinforcement for the desired behavior.

Note that it was far more tempting for Shakespeare to place his paw in the bucket as he approached it from a distance; the test for this behavior was his ability to approach from across the room and place his head in the bucket cleanly.

Can it ever be useful?
So is it always wrong to mark a behavior as non-reinforcing? Keep in mind that blanket generalizations are always wrong (irony intended!). Some informational cues could be called NRMs, because they signal the lack of potential for reinforcement—a red light rather than the more common and cuing green light. My dogs have learned if I say “shoo” while I’m at the computer, I’m not available to play, while at other times a nose poke might elicit attention. In this situation, “shoo” is a signal that future offered behaviors will not be reinforced. (Most pet owners will recognize that our pets know a host of these types of cues, mostly non-verbal.)

Most of the time, however, I see NRMs used as a crutch where the initial training was not clean and precise. This puts the burden of the trainer’s mistake on the learner, who didn’t receive adequate data in the first place and must now sort through additional cues, stimuli, and frustration. The vast majority of the time, the “need” for an NRM can be avoided through proper attention to training basics—good timing, appropriate criteria, and a high rate of reinforcement.

I think there is an application for NRMs in a situation where click/non-click is not clear to the subject, but these situations are rare and most trainers will not encounter them. This makes training an NRM “in case of need” a waste of effort. Spend your time training more cleanly in the first place and you’ll never need the NRM.

Alternatives to a punishing NRM
So what’s a trainer to do when a learner errs? There are several alternatives to the NRM as unintentional punisher. A time-out (usually the removal of the trainer’s attention and/or opportunity) is negative punishment, rather than positive punishment. A least-reinforcing stimulus (LRS, a complete lack of response from the trainer or environment) is true extinction—and generally the best response to an error. A trainer working at a good pace (15-20 reps per minute for a simple behavior) may pause only a second for an LRS and then move on with the next repetition, but that is enough to note the error and its (lack of) consequence. (I use an LRS at the 59 second point in the video “Fixing Behaviors without an NRM.”)

Training without aversives
Even potentially useful tools can be harmful, especially if they are a crutch for the sloppy use of preferred tools. In Animal Training: Successful Animal Management Through Positive Reinforcement, Ken Ramirez wrote, “I frequently discourage [novice] trainers from ever conditioning a ‘no’ signal, because if there is not a signal for ‘not’ it cannot be overused.”

In the process of writing this article, even though I am arguing against the use of NRMs, I have found myself using more NRMs in my own training—having them on my mind made me more likely to use them even though I knew better!

While it is true that many learners can work through NRMs, it is equally true that many cannot (and many who can, do better without). It is a difficult habit for a trainer to break. Having the option can create the opportunity or even the need. As songwriter Jonathan Coulton noted, “We do what we must because we can.” To avoid aversives in training, be aware of them in all forms, and plan accordingly.

*********


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

3GSD4IPO said:


> I know Susan Garrett and do not buy into all she does. Some is good.


I'm curious about this too. You "know" Susan Garrett? 

I've actually had her as a student in my obedience classes. Her 'Say Yes' facility is a stone's throw from the ob club where I teach. Whether you buy into all she does or not, let me tell you - she is VERY knowledgeable and experienced, and a FAR more trustworthy source than most, including Leerburg and Monique Anstee. Susan hasn't earned her world-wide reputation by being a simple flash in the pan.

So yeah. A little bit more than "some is good", lol.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> There is another thing that you are probably aware of. All these video and seminar trainers only show you what is socially acceptable. Some of them only do what is socially acceptable when they train but many do not. Many do not show you the "other side" or the "dark side" in seminars, videos etc. You may see it in a one to one lesson.. you may not (remember, they are making a living and some are making a very good living and they cannot afford negative feedback). You will, in most cases, never see the positive punishment they use in any thing you buy or watch on line or in person.
> 
> The end result is that while their techniques appear clear and clean, they get performances the rest cannot get no matter how skillfully their techniques are applied by others. Yes, they are pros and know their business. No question. They also use techniques when necessary that will never make it to their latest books, videos or seminars. Some of those techniques are not.. how shall I put this? "socially acceptable..."


You have GOT to be joking with this. You are seriously going to accuse these trainers of this? Unless you can PROVE this goes on, I'd be making a serious retraction right about now, because this is libel.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

Wow 3GSD. You know, I appreciated some of your posts as they can provide good food for thought and show you have understanding of training. But it doesn't erase how unpleasant and downright toxic you can be. 

"Negative feedback" is overrated. There are tons of balanced trainers who have done so much harm and have 5 star reviews. These are all personal experiences of mine, folks I have personally worked with after they had a negative experience with other trainers, not accusations or anecdotes... Person who witnessed her 'trainer' beat her 8-10 week puppy over the head repeatedly to get it to stop barking. No bad reviews. Dog is doing great today. 5 star trainer working with a 6-8 mo puppy with genetic/fear/handling issues, told the kids to leave the room and shocked the dog in a way that made her scream. Owner's words to me: "It was hard to watch." Then charged a few THOUSAND more for board&train, in which the trainer noticed no problems at all - zero results. Then the trainer suggested they rehome the dog (which I don't necessarily disagree with). No bad reviews. Dog is still in the home and doing better with positive training. Another different 5 star trainer, prong collar for a dog reactive dog who was getting worse and bleeding from the neck from the prong corrections... (dog is fine now and not reactive, btw), no bad reviews from the owner. I have more second-hand stories of dogs being kicked and pinned in public, jabbed in the ribs, because their 5 star trainers has presented that as okay. It's a funny world... people are afraid to share their bad experiences.

You accuse a certain group of trainers for using [harsher] punishment privately. There is no need. There are plenty of people doing it in broad daylight. It IS still socially acceptable. What is unacceptable, is making claims about people you don't know. Is it mind boggling that the dog is so well trained, that the only way for you to understand is in your mind they MUST be using punishment behind closed doors? Speaks more to your narrow scope than to anything else. I can list a dozen reasons (ex. lack of generalization, body language and stress signals, performance off leash under great stress and lack of reinforcers, etc.) why even on a technical level your statement is absurd.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

3GSD4IPO said:


> The end result is that while their techniques appear clear and clean, they get performances the rest cannot get _no matter how skillfully their techniques are applied by others_. Yes, they are pros and know their business. No question. They also use techniques when necessary that will never make it to their latest books, videos or seminars. Some of those techniques are not.. how shall I put this? "socially acceptable..."



"...They get performances that *I, 3GSDIPO, who do not have the compassion, respect, or humility to accept that there are other methods of training other than my own* cannot get, no matter *how much I just stick to my own guns and expect outstanding results from every [confident] dog ever, even types of dogs I've never worked with and in fact actually look down on*."

There, fixed it for you.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

If you are being honest, then there should be no problems providing proof? If there was any that (insert famous R+ trainer here) did anything heinous out of the view of the public, then you would be correct. There's nothing wrong with you being correct (and I have no issues with being wrong) - but there's something wrong with making incriminating statements without proof.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

You know, I came very close to saying nothing here both because I was sincerely pretty offended and angry, and because I didn't see much point in wasting the time and energy to type it up. 

Then I remembered this is a forum and people come here for information and many of them aren't participating but are following. 

So, this is what I've got. 

1-) I very much agree with Canyx's read on this situation. You lack the knowledge and skill and rather than admit that you're going to just flip it around and decide it's impossible. 

2-) You're right. No one ever knows what anyone else does in the privacy of their homes, but: a-) it is socially acceptable to use physical corrections and I know many people who merrily admit to doing so (that I even respect) and b-) I know what goes on in MY home and my life and that's all the evidence I need that it works. 

3-) No one trains with one quadrant. That's stupid. That doesn't translate to physical punishment. 

4, and this is the big/long one-) Training without physical corrections, physical punishment, coercion, fear, or physical manipulation of the dog is hard. It's a thing that we admittedly don' talk much about. It is relatively easy to correct away unwanted behavior. To gain compliance through fear, pain, and fear of pain. It doesn't take much understanding, really, of your dog or of motivators or of anything. All you have to do is make doing the thing result in something the dog hates a lot and it goes away. 

Teaching the dog how to *learn*, to offer behavior, to build that behavior and to build desire to work with you, trust, partnership and communication? Those things are slower. You have to put the steps in. You have to learn about your dog. You have to BUILD IT and it's no fast, and it's not easy. When your background tells you that one good, hard, leash correction or an e-collar will get you the 'same' result (outwardly, to you), and you don't understand what you gain in NOT doing that - not just in relationship but in complexity of behavior and reliability and performance and attitude - because you're not aware of what the dog is capable of? What DOGS are all capable of? 

Yeah, I'm sure it seems pretty unlikely that anyone else would do all that. 

That's just sad, but it really says nothing about training with rewards, and a whole heck of a lot about the person leveling accusations.


----------



## DaySleepers (Apr 9, 2011)

Pretty much my thoughts exactly, Canyx.

Most trainers who eschew physical punishment and follow force free/R+ ideology aren't doing it to score politically correct points. They're doing it because they genuinely wish to improve the communication, relationship, and overall welfare of the dogs they work with. They do it because they see clear and tangible improvements in these techniques over what the other options out there have offered. They do it because they have a moral opposition to using painful or stressful techniques in the grand majority of circumstances, or they do it simply because they believe the science that says they don't _have_ to use those techniques anymore. And guess what: a lot of trainers in this group disagree on various finer points, too. They're learning and changing their approach and philosophy as they grow. They're not organizing some kind of massive scam/conspiracy where they're covering up that the only way to get reliable results is to use corrections or other "socially unacceptable" techniques, as you put it 3GSD.

I use NRMs, as I said before. It's sloppy training. I get far better results when I focus on changing my criteria and rate of reinforcement instead. In fact, I've found that I get much better results across the board the more I commit to various "rewards based" or "force free" techniques, even when it's hard or inconvenient or time consuming. Grooming has gotten much easier since I've started implementing cooperative care techniques and learned to "ask" for consent. Yes, even though sometimes I can't allow him to have a choice in the matter for his own comfort and health. His reactivity is much improved since I've learned to help him control his own distance to his triggers, and to use relief from stress and pressure as a reward. And a lot of things have improved - recall, resilience, general stress behaviors - since I've started going out of my way to do activities that give him more freedom and control in his everyday life.

I'm a piss poor trainer by all concrete metrics. I've had a measly six years of dog experience - not even training experience, just living with a dog - with only a single dog, doing pretty much only basic "pet" things and some silly trick training. No titles, no certificates, nothing. I'm clumsy and have made a lot of mistakes and had to learn a lot about even reading dog body language, since I'd never lived with one before Sam. His early years were some of the most difficult I've had, which didn't help anything. So when my amateur self can make major improvements simply by _reading these trainers' books_ or other freely available material, I really can't take the accusation that the "real" secret is they're using punitive methods behind closed doors seriously. Like, at all.

And it makes the person making such accusations seem ignorant, arrogant, and bitter, but that's not anything new. Hey, 3GSD, ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect, by any chance?


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I see this weird conflating all the time on facebook groups. 

People will decide that an e-collar is the ONLY way to have a dog be reliable off leash, ever, and the options are no off leash or use the e-collar, so being able to let the dog off leash compensates for the pain of using the 'stim' of the collar! 

Like... there are no other options in their head, at all. 

It's bizarre.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

Me, in those shoes, I would've attended the seminar  .


----------

