Encouragement for amateurs and pos. trainers in field trials

[mitty]

Butting in late here but I wouldn't consider R+ training to be traditional or old. Yes we've always used positive reinforcement but clicker or marker training and understanding how dogs learn and respond has made tremendous advancements in the past 10 years or so (from my understanding). I follow Lardy but I do think there is great potential to train dogs the way Lindsay is doing (a program just hasn't been developed yet). Read a little about any of the protection sports training where they have embraced it with amazing results. From my understanding, the schutzhund people didn't think R+ training could ever produce like traditional methods either. Now they still use R- and P+ but not to a large extent.

I didn't mean to imply that the R+ methods were older, maybe "other" is a better word. I'm gonna go change it now...

[Shawn White]

Quote "No one has ever gotten 5 Qual jams in one season with a Golden trained without compulsion and force fetch, until now."


Where /who has kept these records so show this? NO where have I seen records of dogs training methods when on EE or any other statistical sites.. Ever is a long time and there are a lot of dogs that have received RJ's or Jam's since the existence of FT's. I would think that since this training is not as well known that the folks who have done this may not be well known either.

I am not trying to down grade the accomplishment only saying that to some it may not be that great of an accomplishment compared to the time spent, as each take their own path to get to the same destination.

[rboudet]

The second one. I think this is the first time people have tried to apply a mainly R+ method to advanced field training. Therefore, there are some things to work out. Part of figuring it out is to actually take a dog through the process to see what the real life scenarios require. Then to test the skills at an actual trial. You could say that Laddie is an experiment dog. Lindsay has been carefully documenting his training, his tools and his failure/successes along the way. I'll bet when he gets a new pup, it will go much much faster and that he will reach a higher level of success.

As for the woodworker analogy, John Robinson asked that earlier and I gave my best answer in post #62. This stuff works, it works fast and it stays in the dog's brain. On top of that, it's really fun.

If it works, and is fast and stays in the brain, why did it take so long to start earning Jams? Is it the complexity of the the FT test and concepts? Or is the training not to that level yet? I agree, you can proberly make a good gun dog using these methods. (dont know anything about the dog but could Jamming Q be the highest level of his ability) To be able to compete at the AA level and most Q's (not all Q's are created equal) it takes a really good dog and really good training methods. Pleae dont take this as questioning your/his methods, just bored at work.

[kip]

If it works, and is fast and stays in the brain, why did it take so long to start earning Jams? Is it the complexity of the the FT test and concepts? Or is the training not to that level yet? I agree, you can proberly make a good gun dog using these methods. (dont know anything about the dog but could Jamming Q be the highest level of his ability) To be able to compete at the AA level and most Q's (not all Q's are created equal) it takes a really good dog and really good training methods. Pleae dont take this as questioning your/his methods, just bored at work.

exactly, a qual is not really a measure of a well trained trial dog. i got a second with a dog when he was 14 months old, he didnt place in an allage trial until way later.

[John Robinson]

exactly, a qual is not really a measure of a well trained trial dog. i got a second with a dog when he was 14 months old, he didnt place in an allage trial until way later.

That was my first take to, but the point here isn't comparing this Positively trained dog to conventionally trained dogs at this point, the points are:

1) Applying these training techniques to field dogs is relatively new.
2) Doing this is kind of an experiment, nobody knows if it will work or how well it will work, much less if it will ever work as well as conventional training.
3) To the OP's knowledge, this is a high water mark for a purely positively trained field dog, so something to cheer about, even if it is modest bu some of our standards.

Like many of you I am in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" camp, and have been happy doing what 95% have done, but if it weren't for people trying new things through history, we would still be wearing animal skins and using our dogs to drag our stuff from camp to camp. So I say good for Laddie and Jennifer, success might be slow to start, but hopefully she can prove her point and revolutionize retriever training.

[kip]

i think alot of these ideas where used way before e collars. i just get the fellin, and it could be just me, that some of this is due to the fact that people havent seen the right way to train with the so called conventional methods. i promise my dogs are happy.

[kip]

by the way not tring to start anything, its raining outside and i am bored to death.

[Paul "Happy" Gilmore]

Nothing wrong with having different tools in your belt? I know trainers were probably hesitant to use the e-collar when they came out. When they came out they experienced problems and created problems. They had to learn how to apply the technique properly before it became an effective tool. Through this process, many trainers became "greats" and got their names in the Hall of Fame. They have tools in their belts that nobody who employ's 100% modern methods will ever learn from video's and seminars. Do all their tools work, are all the tools still viable today? Nope. Not saying that just like this thread isn't about convincing someone to use a specific method. I see it as being more about learning. Maybe even learning something new?

[kip]

Nothing wrong with having different tools in your belt? I know trainers were probably hesitant to use the e-collar when they came out. When they came out they experienced problems and created problems. They had to learn how to apply the technique properly before it became an effective tool. Through this process, many trainers became "greats" and got their names in the Hall of Fame. They have tools in their belts that nobody who employ's 100% modern methods will ever learn from video's and seminars. Do all their tools work, are all the tools still viable today? Nope. Not saying that just like this thread isn't about convincing someone to use a specific method. I see it as being more about learning. Maybe even learning something new?

well said.

[gdgnyc]

Good answer Jennifer,

Some of us tend to project our viewpoint on others, I know I am suseptable to doing that, and that is what I did here. I bolded the part of your post that really interest me. I am a product of all the trainers both pro and amateur that I have trained with for the past twenty years. It is quite a large number, but the general methods don't vary much from individual to individual. That said I occasionally run into Janice Gunn at a trial here or there and have a nice visit with her. I would love to learn how to obedience train with her. I would also like to see this clicker technique you brought up. I've got a five month old, very smart Golden that I'm doing obedience with right now. He's an smart, easy, tractible pup, so everything is going along smoothly, buteasier and smoother would be better.

Anyway, I apologize if I poured a little cold water on Laddie's impressive accomplishment, I have had very talented dogs go through long dry patches running all stakes, so four in a row is very impressive.

John

John, I do competition obedience with my dog. I use the clicker. You would be surprised at the speed something can be taught by marking the behavior. It is precise and if done properly the dog learns that it can succeed. And in many cases it can speed up the learning process. As stated earlier I ridiculed it at first. Not now. I might add that I have trained other ways. I have added the clicker to my toolbox.

I just have to add that I have used it for what I call "field obedience". I cleared up many issues. The only one that remains to be cleared up is the misunderstanding my training partners have about my methods. I will be clicking their behavior, too.