Training; traditional/remote collar
Ed, this is a general commentary following your Post #36. And, only intended
to present History in a perspective - 'right or otherwise'.
In either scenario, 'single phase remote'/'variable phase remote', genetics had to
be there, notwithstanding the pain threshold. Elliot, Morgan, Pershall, D.L.,
Sweezey, Schomer, Huffstetter, R. Gomia, Baird, Voigt, et al were traditional and
utilized methods plain and simple described as fundamental and objective - "whatever
worked". Of course, thresholds varied. Some animals accepted stress, some did not.
Early training was not for the faint hearted nor the physically impaired.
While the early remote was/seemed to be a panacea for past routines, as I say,
many trainers Pros & Amateurs over did it. And, that hasn't ended today.
Distance has permeated the game - marks & blinds. I believe this has evolved
because of the variable remote. Distance has created ancillary issues directly
related to handler conduct on the line; excessive time & excessive lining to marks.
And, with many folks in the game comes other issues relating to determining the
"relative merits"; judging. Distance escalated as the remote became widely utilized
spawning - begging the term - the "tennis shoe" trainer. Good for the game on one hand,
clearly an impetus resulting in more competitive successful animals & handlers.
Of course, much improved selective (line) breeding has caused desired repetitive
genetics to surface. How that results in 'threshold' levels probably is also relative.
It's impossible to say that today's animals have a different threshold vs. 40+
years ago.
I think it is accurate to say that today's handlers - Pros & Amateurs - have a changed/
different way to find the "end of the rope" of success in training.
Respectfully,
WD.
.
