[Travis Schneider]

I am getting the Bill Hillman video to bring my new BLM pup along with. My question to you is which of these two systems is the best transition over from the Hillman puppy DVD(Lardy or Graham)?

I know that Lardy has a flow chart that he likes for everyone to follow, but does the Hillman puppy DVD lead you off on the right foot to start in with Lardy when the time is right? Lardy is the way I was leading towards.

Anyone ever done this?

 

[DoubleHaul]

Both of the flow charts and the systems are similar and both start the basics with formal obedience after socialization, etc. Hillman basically would be the socialization and introduction to the field ( with some other things, like hold, introduced), so it would be easy to go with whichever system you felt you liked better.

 

[Mike Smith]

I am ending up the Hillman Puppy and going into Hillman Fetch. The puppy ends with CC going into collar fetch. I would go into Lardy which is what I plan on doing after Hillman Fetch.

 

[Todd Caswell]

Don't over look Stawski's "Fowldawg" series. Very affordable and easy to follow.

 

[Keith Stroyan]

I'm very pleased with the new edition of the Lardy Total Retriever.

 

[Chris Atkinson]

I had a nice lunch with Mr. Hillman the other day.

We touched briefly on the notion of using his stuff and then transitioning into Lardy's. I'd say this would work brilliantly and that a good trainer, with a good dog would have wonderful success going this route.

Chris

 

[Evan]

Choose the Carr-based system that suits you best. Any good one should be a fit to carry on from that good foundation. Pick a one that is sequential, and that you find understandable. Good luck.

Evan

 

[RetrieversONLINE]

Choose the Carr-based system that suits you best. Any good one should be a fit to carry on from that good foundation. Pick a one that is sequential, and that you find understandable. Good luck.

Evan

Evan

This is a very interesting suggestion and I think I understand it's basis. However, I think that in some ways Hillman is the antithesis of the Carr-based system although of course he uses elements of it like everyone else. How can you not?

What's also interesting to me is that the so-called "Lardy" system as discussed here is somewhat based on a Carr system because Mike learned a basic sequence from a Carr protegee. However, Mike did not study visit with Rex until the late 1990's long after he had refined and developed his own program and teachings. Consequently, many of Mike's approaches and his philosphy towards dogs is actually quite different than many Carr disciples.

I think that if you are going to follow Hillman's Puppy work and his Fetch command DVD you will need to adopt a quite different philosophy to force and pressure than a Carr based system. Witness many of the recent "problem" threads where the suggestion has routinely been "force". Many of these probelms would be treated very differently with a Hillman pup process.

I am not saying that a Hillman style trained puppy can not be transitioned into a Carr based system BUT I am saying that a Hillman trained puppy is developed very differently than the classic Carr based system puppy. I think this leaves the territory open to train that puppy somewhat differently and with a different philosophy in the future.

PS. I am in the midst of yet another Hillman approach puppy blended with my own approaches and I can assure it challenges many of the conventional techniques. It is an ecclectic blend of many schools.

Cheers

 

[limiman12]

my eleven month old has done quite well going from Hillman to Smartworks...

Anything to anything puts your puppy ahead of the vast majority of dogs.........

 

[Todd Caswell]

Dennis,

Could you please elaborate on this part of your post, very interested hearing you explain the differences.

Hillman trained puppy is developed very differently than the classic Carr based system puppy.

 

[Charles C.]

I think the Hillman video transitions pretty seamlessly into the Lardy program if you cut it off after the hold portion and condition to stick pressure and take the pup through a more traditional form of force fetch. Either way, Bill's approach to steadiness is light years better than the old horse jockey approach.

 

[Renee P.]

I am doing retriever training for the first time, I used Hillman's puppy DVD, and his fetch DVD. I've been following the Lardy program for a few weeks. After I finished Hillman's "fetch" I stumbled around the Lardy material for a few days---I went through some stuff like walking fetch just to make sure my pup was prepared and then started pile work. Being inexperienced, everything is taking me longer.

From one newbie to another, my advice is to see if you know someone who will loan you their Lardy or the Smartworks or whatever else you are considering. Watch a little of each of them. Maybe one will appeal to you more than the other. You can find some clips on the internet. Preview them after you have used Hillman's puppy program for awhile, and if you use his fetch dvd watch a little of it ahead of time to get the idea where you will be when you are done. I went with TRT for various reasons (for example, some people I trained with use it) but I have Smartworks, too, and the two programs "feel" quite different to me.

Anyhow, here's one more person that has used Hillman then Lardy.

 

[Howard N]

Dennis,

Could you please elaborate on this part of your post, very interested hearing you explain the differences.

Hillman trained puppy is developed very differently than the classic Carr based system puppy.

I wonder what I missed. What is a classic Carr based puppy program?

 

[Todd Caswell]

I wonder what I missed. What is a classic Carr based puppy program?

Thats what I was wondering...

 

[Kasomor]

Hillman to Lardy.

x 3 What is a classic Carr based puppy program?

 

[Evan]

Evan

This is a very interesting suggestion and I think I understand it's basis. However, I think that in some ways Hillman is the antithesis of the Carr-based system although of course he uses elements of it like everyone else. How can you not?

Dennis,

I'm not inferring the two courses of study follow each other dynamically. Only that Hillman's is a puppy program first and foremost, and that it appears to produce a very sound foundation on which a puppy's formal education can be built. That's all I could ask for in a puppy coming into my Basics course. He provides them with lots of marks, good obedience & an essential course of force fetch - to which I would add the needed segments to continue.

I see no reason why a post-Hillman-trained pup would not be a good fit to start formal Basics in my program or Mike's. I surely wish the ones I used to get as a pro had preparation of that quality before arriving at my kennel!

Evan

 

[RetrieversONLINE]

Hillman to Lardy.

x 3 What is a classic Carr based puppy program?

When I said a Carr based puppy program, I meant the conventional approach used by those who use a Carr based program. That approach was also one that Rex endorsed and his clients followed for the most part in the past.

For those of you that have it, I explained in some depth the differences in the May-June 2009 issue of Retrievers ONLINE. In a nutshell, the conventional approach involves
1. Much environmental experience, 2. fun obedience but not a lot of high standard heel, here and sit until later, 3. Not steady until part way into Basics, 4. white bumpers-teach to use eyes, 5. lots of marks with gunners, guns, asap and let them go quickly.

Hillman is very different except for #1 above. 2. Lots of obedience-sit is huge, 3. Steady very young, 4. orange bumpers -emphasize nose, 5. no guns, gunners until obedient sit and steady which starts at a few months old.

As far as force fetch--dramatically differnt-NO chamber of horrors, no ear pinch-no grind it out sessions, Hold, fetch off the ground are transparent and mixed in outdoor field sessions. Puppies are conditioned to collar pressure and to lead jerks but in informal sessions while doing lots of other things. The systematic session of using force for CC and fetch is quite different and the pup hardly knows he is learning it..

I follow a Lardy sequence afterwards with such a pup starting with Pilework which skills were learned at 4-5 months in terms of go, stop, come, remote send, front finish-everything except the force back.

Furthermore, I think that using a Hillman puppy philosophy you will use a lot less force than a typical Carr based program and your first recourse is NOT "force" as we see so often suggested here.

So yes, it can transition seamlessly into many other programs. But, it's important to understand that it is quite different than what most people have historically recommended as in Puppy sections of Smartworks, Lardy, FowlDawg and Mertens. The big thing is you don't have to work on un-doing so many bad habits at the line and thus you use less force there working on steadiness. Trust me --I know about that!!!

 

[Travis Schneider]

Thanks for all of the insight on this guys.

Y'all are really helping this rookie out. Stay tuned...I'm gonna wear y'all out with questions.

 

[Howard N]

Thanks Dennis, I never knew Carr recommended anything on puppy raising. I've never seen your list before, although it's similar to what I've seen recommended by others. What I've done is an adaption of what Ferucci did. Different from both.

For those of you that have it, I explained in some depth the differences in the May-June 2009 issue of Retrievers ONLINE. In a nutshell, the conventional approach involves
1. Much environmental experience, 2. fun obedience but not a lot of high standard heel, here and sit until later, 3. Not steady until part way into Basics, 4. white bumpers-teach to use eyes, 5. lots of marks with gunners, guns, asap and let them go quickly.

 

[Kasomor]

When I said a Carr based puppy program, I meant the conventional approach used by those who use a Carr based program. That approach was also one that Rex endorsed and his clients followed for the most part in the past.

For those of you that have it, I explained in some depth the differences in the May-June 2009 issue of Retrievers ONLINE. In a nutshell, the conventional approach involves
1. Much environmental experience, 2. fun obedience but not a lot of high standard heel, here and sit until later, 3. Not steady until part way into Basics, 4. white bumpers-teach to use eyes, 5. lots of marks with gunners, guns, asap and let them go quickly.

Hillman is very different except for #1 above. 2. Lots of obedience-sit is huge, 3. Steady very young, 4. orange bumpers -emphasize nose, 5. no guns, gunners until obedient sit and steady which starts at a few months old.

As far as force fetch--dramatically differnt-NO chamber of horrors, no ear pinch-no grind it out sessions, Hold, fetch off the ground are transparent and mixed in outdoor field sessions. Puppies are conditioned to collar pressure and to lead jerks but in informal sessions while doing lots of other things. The systematic session of using force for CC and fetch is quite different and the pup hardly knows he is learning it..

I follow a Lardy sequence afterwards with such a pup starting with Pilework which skills were learned at 4-5 months in terms of go, stop, come, remote send, front finish-everything except the force back.

Furthermore, I think that using a Hillman puppy philosophy you will use a lot less force than a typical Carr based program and your first recourse is NOT "force" as we see so often suggested here.

So yes, it can transition seamlessly into many other programs. But, it's important to understand that it is quite different than what most people have historically recommended as in Puppy sections of Smartworks, Lardy, FowlDawg and Mertens. The big thing is you don't have to work on un-doing so many bad habits at the line and thus you use less force there working on steadiness. Trust me --I know about that!!!

Thanks Dennis.