[RobinZClark]

I know what it is...but not well enough to explain it to a dear friend. Can you help me by providing some good examples?

When is it effective? When is it not effective?

Thank you!

 

[polmaise]

I know what it is...but not well enough to explain it to a dear friend. Can you help me by providing some good examples?

When is it effective? When is it not effective?

Thank you!

How would you explain it to Us?

 

[RobinZClark]

When the dog makes an error, you stop him at the point where he made the error, simplify the situation slightly and try the situation again. This is attrition.

It is effective when the dog is trying, but doesn't yet have a good understanding of what is being asked. It is not effective when the dog is not trying. You will know if it is effective or not because if it is effective the dog will start to get the task right on the first try. If the dog never seems to learn, then either they are not trying, and you need to apply pressure, or you are doing a poor job of making the situation simpler.

 

[copterdoc]

Attrition means to gradually wear down.
Good examples include casting drills, lining drills, and other no-no drills.

You give the dog a choice, it chooses wrong, you stop the dog and make it do it over. And you keep hammering away, until the dog does it right.

While the above examples are things that are most commonly done using primarily attrition as the "correction", attrition can be used to modify behaviours in any training scenario.

And just because it doesn't involve "correcting" with the stick or e-collar, doesn't mean that the dog "likes" being corrected through attrition. It can easily get the dog way "down". It can also cause new problems to crop up like no-goes, or bugging.

 

[polmaise]

Instead of applying pressure for errors that the dog makes, I would stop him at the point where he made the error, simplify the situation slightly and try the situation again.

That would require acute timing?..Why 'Instead' ?..what would have been your alternative prior to this?

 

[Mary Lynn Metras]

From Mike Lardy "Attrition is a training technique whereby you get your dog to comply to your command by wearing him down. That is, you repeat the command until the dog gets it right, and you prevent the dog from doing the wrong behavior. You don't punish him for the wrong behavior -- you simply prevent him from doing it. For example, suppose your dog goes straight "back" when you give him an "over" command. Using attrition, you would stop him immediately and give the "over" command again. If he went "back" again, you would stop him again."


http://www.totalretriever.com/index.php/resources/training-tips/51-attrition

 

[RobinZClark]

That would require acute timing?..Why 'Instead' ?..what would have been your alternative prior to this?

Can you rephrase your question? I do not have a clear undestanding of what you are asking.

 

[polmaise]

Can you rephrase your question? I do not have a clear undestanding of what you are asking.

You said ''Instead'' ?
Instead of what?

 

[RobinZClark]

Attrition means to gradually wear down.

And just because it doesn't involve "correcting" with the stick or e-collar, doesn't mean that the dog "likes" being corrected through attrition. It can easily get the dog way "down". It can also cause new problems to crop up like no-goes, or bugging.

I would say that if you don't make the situation simpler and ensure success on the 2nd or 3rd attempt, then the dog will be demoralized by this technique. If you do make the situation simpler, and the dog is successful on the next go round I think that the dog gets a feeling of accomplishment.

Why would you not simplify the situation if the dog was unclear about the right choices? Why would you not use correction if the dog knew what to do but was choosing not to do it? In other words, I don't understand why you would just ask a dog to do the behavior over and over again until they were finally worn down. I know some people do this but is it really the most effective strategy?

 

[captainjack]

That would require acute timing?..Why 'Instead' ?..what would have been your alternative prior to this?

Not Robin, but...
The alternative to not applying pressure would typically be to nick with an ecollar if the dog is at a distance.
In the example that Mary Lynn gave from Mike Lardy's explanation. You would stop the dog with a sit whistle for taking the wrong cast, nick, and then give the same cast again. Although Mike advocates giving the dog a 2nd cast (attrition), before giving the nick.

To continue stopping and casting with no correction with a collar, lead, stick, etc. until you get the desired cast is attrition.

I am curious how you would deal with a dog that continued to go back rather than change directions since you don't use an ecollar? Would you typically use attrition as described by Lardy, or would you go out to the dog and give a physical correction?

Thee collar allows those of us who use it, the ability to give a well timed, measured correction when needed.

 

[copterdoc]

I would say that if you don't make the situation simpler and ensure success on the 2nd or 3rd attempt, then the dog will be demoralized by this technique. If you do make the situation simpler, and the dog is successful on the next go round I think that the dog gets a feeling of accomplishment.

Why would you not simplify the situation if the dog was unclear about the right choices? Why would you not use correction if the dog knew what to do but was choosing not to do it? In other words, I don't understand why you would just ask a dog to do the behavior over and over again until they were finally worn down. I know some people do this but is it really the most effective strategy?

There is a difference between simplifying a tough test, and removing the very question that the dog needs to answer.

Simplifying, means to ask an easier question.
Not to remove the question from the test.

If the question that the dog needs to answer correctly, is as easy and clearly defined as it can be made, you have to make the dog answer that question correctly.

Success can only come to the dog, by it's choosing to perform the correct action.

 

[captainjack]

Unless I'm misreading Copterdoc, he is not advocating that attrition is the best or most efficient method of gaining compliance, but is only defining what attrition is. Lardy defines attrition in much the same way, but in his program it is generally stop and cast, stop and cast (did he see your cast), the stop-nick-and cast. Mike also advocates simplifying the task as well. I never interpreted Mike's philosophy as advocating attrition to the point of infinity without simplification. Similarly, he does not advocate continuing to apply ecollar corrections until you get compliance.

 

[22899]

Lets say a channel blind:

Dog is centered in channel, but slowly starts to give in to dirt. Stop the dog, cast is given to get more water. Dog refuses, wants dirt again. Stop dog again, no collar correction, repeat cast for more water. Keep this up , with no collar correction,until dog ttakes correct cast. Timing is critical
Make sure you stop the dog as soon as it makes the wrong move.

 

[Breck]

I know what it is...but not well enough to explain it to a dear friend. Can you help me by providing some good examples?

When is it effective? When is it not effective?

Thank you!

.
Sort of like teaching a new lover just what floats your boat. You will try gental persuasion and guidance for a while (attrition) before you resort to cutting him off (indirect pressure) or smacking him on the head (pressure).

 

[copterdoc]

....Why would you not simplify the situation if the dog was unclear about the right choices? Why would you not use correction if the dog knew what to do but was choosing not to do it?.....

I get the feeling that you believe that "lack of effort" always warrants a correction with applied pressure. While "honest mistakes" should be dealt with through simplification and attrition.

However, that's not really the case.
Attrition is a correction. It is a form of pressure.

And just like a collar correction, if repeatedly used to correct "honest mistakes", it can also produce the same "fear of failure" that Lardy talks about in TRT.

Is it "safer" to respond with attrition when in doubt? Yes, I'd say that it is. For most dogs, in most situations.

But that doesn't mean that attrition isn't a powerful correction, that can also be used to correct the dog even when you know that it is not​ trying as hard as it should be.

 

[RobinZClark]

There is a difference between simplifying a tough test, and removing the very question that the dog needs to answer.

Simplifying, means to ask an easier question.
Not to remove the question from the test.

If the question that the dog needs to answer correctly, is as easy and clearly defined as it can be made, you have to make the dog answer that question correctly.

Success can only come to the dog, by it's choosing to perform the correct action.

You make a very important point that I have missed. One of my weaknesses is to simplify so that the dog is successful, while never getting the essential lesson taught. This is why my training has a tendency to move very slowly. I avoid confrontation and feel great about myself while making little progress. Thank you for this insight.

 

[RobinZClark]

I get the feeling that you believe that "lack of effort" always warrants a correction with applied pressure. While "honest mistakes" should be dealt with through simplification and attrition.

However, that's not really the case.
Attrition is a correction. It is a form of pressure.

You are understanding me correctly. This has been my working strategy. I think I have been off base and need to revise my strategies. Thank you so much!

 

[Renee P.]

Lets say a channel blind:

Dog is centered in channel, but slowly starts to give in to dirt. Stop the dog, cast is given to get more water. Dog refuses, wants dirt again. Stop dog again, no collar correction, repeat cast for more water. Keep this up , with no collar correction,until dog ttakes correct cast. Timing is critical
Make sure you stop the dog as soon as it makes the wrong move.

I think this is how you teach a dog to scallop.

 

[polmaise]

Not Robin, but...
The alternative to not applying pressure would typically be to nick with an ecollar if the dog is at a distance.
In the example that Mary Lynn gave from Mike Lardy's explanation. You would stop the dog with a sit whistle for taking the wrong cast, nick, and then give the same cast again. Although Mike advocates giving the dog a 2nd cast (attrition), before giving the nick.

To continue stopping and casting with no correction with a collar, lead, stick, etc. until you get the desired cast is attrition.

I am curious how you would deal with a dog that continued to go back rather than change directions since you don't use an ecollar? Would you typically use attrition as described by Lardy, or would you go out to the dog and give a physical correction?

Thee collar allows those of us who use it, the ability to give a well timed, measured correction when needed.

I gave a 'Hummmphh' with a rub on the chin at Mary Lynn's reply .
I thought of ''context'' when Mr Lardy was speaking about ''Attrition'' !
Would he or you or anyone else advocate the us of the command 'Heel' or 'Sit' more than once if the dog did not comply?
Sit 'nick' Sit ? Or 'nick' Sit 'nick'?
Probably foreign to most your side of the pond, but ''Attrition'' being the battle of 'Will's' . I make sure that all my 'wont's' are not an option .
Good question though captainjack .Thankyou

 

[Doug Main]

You make a very important point that I have missed. One of my weaknesses is to simplify so that the dog is successful, while never getting the essential lesson taught. This is why my training has a tendency to move very slowly. I avoid confrontation and feel great about myself while making little progress. Thank you for this insight.

Don't feel bad, finding the correct balance between simplifying, applying a correction or just using attrition for any particular dog is difficult. That's part of what separates the great trainers from the rest of us.

I remember watching Mike Lardy recall and then resend a young all-age dog 6 times for a long retired water mark It was the last bird of a very tough water triple at an advanced workshop. The 6th time the dog did it absolutely perfectly. Watching that and the discussion with Mike afterwards on his thinking made a HUGE impression on me. I learned so much just watching that 1 dog doing that one setup, it was amazing. There was too much going on to even attempt to describe here. However, the two most impressive things to me, about that were 1. The standards required of the all-age dogs. and 2. That dog was not "demoralized" in the least!