Training a retreiver puppy by Hillmann ?

[Mary Lynn Metras]

The cost is not that big of a deal since I have already bought the thing and am just waiting for it to get here. I plan on doing the training myself. I would like to get Bailey infolved in field trials, but I have no delusions of really competing with the pros... I just don't want to be one of those guys whos dog sits in a kennel from one duck season to the next. To be honest... I really just want a hunting buddy

You will have fun. Enjoy!!!

[captainjack]

Mike, what we seem to have here is a "failure to communicate"

When the words
No...........................Not the end ......................It's just the beginning
Flashed across the screen at the end of the Hillman puppy video...
I did not say to myself. "Oh Good, I can now revert to a Carr based program for the balance of my dogs training".

What I did say was "I wish that Bill would do a sequel"

john

But there was no sequel at that time. So did you wing it on your own trying to do it the way you thought Bill would, did you transition to another program, or did you do something else?

[john fallon]

But there was no sequel at that time. So did you wing it on your own trying to do it the way you thought Bill would, did you transition to another program, or did you do something else?

We are winging it...... With my new puppy I am superimposing the Hillman stuff over a lower intensity version(2's, 3's, with little or no 4's) of the TRT material and tempering it with 50 years of experience.

john

[captainjack]

We are winging it...... With my new puppy I am superimposing the Hillman stuff over a lower intensity version(2's, 3's, with little or no 4's) of the TRT material and tempering it with 50 years of experience.

john

Are you suggesting that someone new to training, who is just learning the jargon, and not having 50 years of experience wing it?

Would they be better off winging it than transitioning to Lardy's TRT?

Do you consider Lardy's TRT high intensity (4's, 5's, and 6's)?

I follow Lardy's TRT and spend virtually all of my time on 3 L, M, and Hs with three different dogs.

[john fallon]

Are you suggesting that someone new to training, who is just learning the jargon, and not having 50 years of experience wing it?

Would they be better off winging it than transitioning to Lardy's TRT?

Do you consider Lardy's TRT high intensity (4's, 5's, and 6's)?

I follow Lardy's TRT and spend virtually all of my time on 3 L, M, and Hs with three different dogs.

What I am saying is that they(someone new to training) might be better off If they could continue in the same vein of the first 28 days of Hillman with another 28 or so more days, than they would be changing to some other program , and this includes the more popular of the Carr based ones.
This is what I said about that early on in this thread http://www.retrievertraining.net/for...04&postcount=3

You ask me what I did since there is yet no sequil, not what I suggested someone new do.....and I told you what I did.

I consider 5 and 6 on the high end no matter
If you revisit TRT you will find Mike says that with the dogs he was demonstrating in that DVD he used a higher intensities when implementing the program than you say that do with your dogs.


john

[MooseGooser]

John

You never did answer:

What Change?

Gooser

[captainjack]

What I am saying is that they(someone new to training) might be better off If they could continue in the same vein of the first 28 days of Hillman with another 28 or so more days, than they would be changing to some other program , and this includes the more popular of the Carr based ones.
...

What specifically are they supposed to continue doing in the same vein...? A new trainer will not know what to do next other than repeat the same 28 days. How is that going to lead to a dog that can run complex multiples and AA cold blinds?

...You ask me what I did since there is yet no sequil, not what I suggested someone new do.....and I told you what I did.
...

I asked what you did because this thread is about what the OP is or should be doing. Your post seemed to indicate that you were not in favor of what most folks were advocating (a transition to Lardy, Graham, Stawski...), so I thought you may be able to shed some light on a viable alternative for a new trainer.

...I consider 5 and 6 on the high end no matter
If you revisit TRT you will find Mike says that with the dogs he was demonstrating in that DVD he used a higher intensities when implementing the program than you say that do with your dogs.
...

Mike does take the dogs up the scale in the CC dvd when de-bolting and he may mention what level a particular dog in the TRT dvd is trained at (I seem to remember him mentioning 4), but he also clearly explains that the level you train your dog at should be the level that elicits the desired behavioral response. If you think TRT advocates high level ecollar burns, then either you or I do need to revisit the TRT dvd because that is most certainly not what I took from it.

[arklahunter]

What is an OP? Trying to follow this new language and am getting a little lost.

[Mary Lynn Metras]

[/QUOTE] Mike does take the dogs up the scale in the CC dvd when de-bolting and he may mention what level a particular dog in the TRT dvd is trained at (I seem to remember him mentioning 4), but he also clearly explains that the level you train your dog at should be the level that elicits the desired behavioral response. If you think TRT advocates high level ecollar burns, then either you or I do need to revisit the TRT dvd because that is most certainly not what I took from it.[/QUOTE] Glenn Guider

Lardy starts at 4 then moves up or down depending on the response from the dog and uses the continuous mode. Prerequisite for cc is formal obedience.

[Howard N]

What is an OP? Trying to follow this new language and am getting a little lost.

OP = Original Poster.

I wasn't going to post on this thread but since I have, I want to say that I thought of the Hillman tape as a good beginning to get a trained dog. At the end the dog was about ready for more formal obedience, then cc or ff whichever you like first then on to the rest of basics and transition.