Oh GOD, a Ceasar wanna be

[Eileen Stein]

It depends on what you consider useful.

I consider it useful to the dog to know what I want it to do, not just what I don't want.

 

If I want the dog to do something in particular, then that is indeed useful information to convey to him. If I want the dog not to do something in particular, it seems to me that that too is useful information to convey to him. As to what I consider useful, "useful" was your term -- you said giving a correction just communicated what you don't want "which tells the dog nothing useful." I assumed you meant "useful" in its ordinary, accepted meaning.

 

I appreciate information as to what I should do rather than an instruction simply to stop what I'm doing in the majority of situations.

 

I really tend to doubt that this is true as you go about your daily life. If you are told not to do something, surely it's more of a restriction on your freedom to be told to do something else instead, rather than simply being told not to do that particular thing and being left an array of other activities to choose from. But I guess we've gone about as far as we can with this.

 

Dogs are capable of intuitive leaps. They are also capable of problem-solving behavior. I have no problem with "shaping" behaviors, but I'd rather give the dog a few hints and see if he can work something out for himself. In my experience, the dog that does this gets a bigger bang out of the whole experience of training and is avid to work as much as it can - with or without treats. Call me anthropomorphic, but I believe dogs can have pride in accomplishment, and a dog that learns to think, solve problems by thinking on its own has pride of accomplishment in spades. It also has something else. It has dignity - and a strong sense of self.

 

Beautifully put, geonni. I think this is especially true of border collies. Typically they derive so much obvious joy and pride from figuring out what you want and doing it. I don't have the "gut reaction" to purely +R/-P training that some others do, but it just seems sad and contrived to me to base all training on extraneous rewards applied according to some scientific formula, rather than training through the subtle, rewarding conversation of intrinsic rewards and corrections. And a little annoying to impute cruelty and ignorance to anyone who does not use this "enlightened, modern" method.

[ziggzmom]

the main reason why I favour clicker training. It produces a thinking dog rather than a robot.

 

Pam

 

When I train my dogs a correction means to help the dog be correct(it's a teaching moment). There are many ways to teach our dogs that aren't abusive.

 

This topic has been really interesting to me and this caught my attention because of something that happened last night when I was training with a couple of friends. We were doing obedience with our dogs and two of us were in the ring at the same time. I had sent my dog to do a retrieve on the flat and as he was returning to me with his dumbell, my friend gave her dog the 'down' command for the drop on recall. I could see my dog momentarilly hesitate at hearing the other dogs down command but just as quickly picked up his pace and came galloping in to front(and was quite please with himself=).

 

This is a 10 year old dog that has not been clicker trained and he is most definatly a thinking dog and not a robot! If you saw him work I think you'd agree-LOL...He understands the excercises and still enjoys training and showing. And best of all, we have a very good time=)

 

Janet

[mum24dog]

In simple human terms if I stare at you, lean over you, step into a space you might have been planning to step into, or just make myself appear bigger when I am around you, then I am putting pressure on you. If I raise my voice, I am putting pressure on you. In stockdog training it might be something as simple as leaning toward the dog, which applies pressure even if the dog is a good distance away on the other side of the sheep from me.

 

Thanks.

As I suspected, it's something many of us do without putting a name to it.

I read your post before the ETA and was trying to figure out why your agility students approach was having the opposite reaction but I understand now - I think.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

One of the things I used to ask my training clients was, "What do 'Bad dog!' and 'no' mean to you?" They nearly always said, "The same thing."

 

That is where the trouble began for many of them, IMO. "No" just means "That's isn't what I want." The implication is "Try again - something different."

 

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the word "No" - it's just the negative connotations our cultures attach to it. No surprise that your clients equate it with "Bad".

 

"No" (or any word) means whatever the human or dog concerned understand by it.

 

If you can be confident that your clients will only use it in future as a no reward marker then there's no problem.

 

Personally I'm in the clicker camp that doesn't consider NRMs particularly useful since the lack of reward for a behaviour that wasn't the one wanted is a marker in itself. However, I do use them sometimes for a dog that needs a bit of extra help if it is getting stuck, just as I would be more likely to prompt a dog like that, but not prompt others.

Same with luring - I don't like it but will use it sparingly if the nature of the dog indicates it.

 

I have no problem with "shaping" behaviors, but I'd rather give the dog a few hints and see if he can work something out for himself. In my experience, the dog that does this gets a bigger bang out of the whole experience of training and is avid to work as much as it can - with or without treats.

 

Depends on the dog. Granted, if it's a BC you're more likely to get that response, but try working without treats with a trailhound and you could be in trouble.

Our BC - Will work for minimal reward. Will respond better to verbal commands than the other dogs. Does not need a clicker, treats or toys. Eager to have his behaviour shaped. Tolerant of physical modelling. But - learns so much quicker,better and confidently hands off with a clicker and rewards.

The exception is when doing agility. Although he runs to his tuggy ball at the end, it's part of his superstitious routine rather than a reward for him.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

But I guess we've gone about as far as we can with this.

 

Me too.

Face to face we'd have a better chance to explain our own stances on this but this way is difficult.

 

Pam

[Eileen Stein]

Me too.

Face to face we'd have a better chance to explain our own stances on this but this way is difficult.

 

You're probably right.

 

There is one thing I meant to comment on, though, and talking specifically about border collies reminded me of it. Earlier you said:

 

It is a fact that a lot of people (especially in the sport world) are harder on BCs than some other breeds because there is a perception that it is necessary - I've seen it time and time again and I can't ignore the fact that it happens.

 

I was quite amazed to read that. I have never encountered this perception that it is necessary to be harder on border collies than other breeds. I don't think it exists here in the US. Has anybody else (folks from the sports world?) run into it?

 

I think it is an astounding misperception, and the reality is quite the opposite.

[kelpiegirl]

Side bar here:

 

May I just that I am impressed at the volume and depth of the thread here. Not having read most of it, as I am not feeling well, but nevertheless, I am glad that folks are chatting- even if my OP was just basically a rant on the way the trainer comported himself, not so much the content of what was done.

Bravo for bringing it up several notches. Off to sleep now.

[Houndstooth]

I just wanted to say that Julie was correct about what I meant by "correct and move on". Since it was apparently misunderstood, I will say that specifically, when I see one of my dogs approaching me looking ready to jump up, and I don't want them to, I will say something like "ah" or "stay off" and turn slightly away from them. Aside from the fact that there are often times when I don't mind them jumping up, I just don't see jumping up as enough of an issue to be worth spending time training for, or against. My dogs don't look fearful about it, and are certainly willing to approach me at another time and essentially ask if they can jump up now. I'm not a brilliant trainer, but it's pretty easy to tell what is an appropriate correction for an individual dog. I will also say, I rarely praise my dogs, on or off sheep, for doing what I ask them to do - I just don't see that they need it. They're quite capable of knowing when things are going well, and don't need constant affirmation from me. I save the affection for when we're just hanging out, and nothing else is going on.

 

As far as corrections shutting a dog down, robot dog vs. thinking dog, I don't how many times I've heard stockdog trainers/handlers say that they would rather have a dog that does the wrong thing than nothing.

 

Angelique

[Eileen Stein]

even if my OP was just basically a rant on the way the trainer comported himself, not so much the content of what was done.

 

Hah! Without a doubt, to my mind, the most obnoxious things about that video were the trainer's smugness and the videographer's adulation.

[Brad]

Has anybody else (folks from the sports world?) run into it?

 

I think it is an astounding misperception, and the reality is quite the opposite.

 

Having 2 BCs and 1 non BC, I'd agree Eileen, that the opposite is true. My BCs are almost self teaching, and require much less "work" to get them to do anything. I think maybe handlers can be more demanding of BCs, I think because they're smart enough to handle the extra demand, but certainly don't require a harder approach. This is based on my experience in agility and flyball, with other than just my BCs....

[mum24dog]

I was quite amazed to read that. I have never encountered this perception that it is necessary to be harder on border collies than other breeds. I don't think it exists here in the US. Has anybody else run into it?

 

I think it is an astounding misperception, and the reality is quite the opposite.

 

Maybe it's a question of numbers.

BCs are everywhere here - in pet, working and sport homes. Living on a small island we're falling over them.

The common message is that if you don't control your BC it will control you - which is true up to a point.

Just like an epidemic, bad advice spreads - and even more so when we're all so close to each other.

There are few parts of the country where people can't easily see farm dogs in situ and where it is apparent that they aren't treated as pampered pets.

You may say that those dogs belong to "no nonsense" types, no doubt, which you would not necessarily see as a bad thing, and it isn't in itself.

It's hard to counteract the public perception of a machiavellian and tough working breed that needs a firm hand because it's true in many cases. It's the understanding of "firm" that is wrong in many owners. (And of course there is the opposite extreme where owners do nothing with their dog and expect it to train itself.) Going back to the original subject of this thread, CM's arrival on our screens hasn't helped.

There is light at the end of the tunnel in sports circles, however. Over the last 10 years the number of successful handlers known to be very hard on their dogs has decreased and some have undergone a remarkable transformation, sometimes as a result of running a non-BC. The ones now at the top are leading by example.

Progress is slower in obedience circles but I'm sure it will come.

 

Pam

[Sue R]

In my experience with puppy, family dog, and fun/beginning level agility, most folks I know just assume if it's a Border Collie, it will be the standout, star pupil in the class - smart, good at retaining, more focussed, and in a different class from most other breeds in its ability to learn and progress quickly.

 

We've talked a lot about "methods" but every method will also be influenced by the person utilizing it, for better or worse (or, should I say, for optimal or less-than-optimal results), and the suitability of the method and its application for the individual dog.

 

As someone once told me (and it applies to pets, performance, and stockdogs) - anyone can hang out a shingle as a dog trainer, but that doesn't make them a good or capable one.

 

Sorry you are feeling under the weather, Julie, but you sure started a good discussion.

[stockdogranch]

As far as sport folks being "harder" on their border collies...I have a student (stockwork) who has had ACDs forever, brought her first ones home from Aus. 30+ years ago. She has run them in agility for some years, then got a couple of border collies. She now has 3 border collies, and the 2 older ones (ages 3 and 4-5) have some bad habits (just general manners-wise), whereas her young (2 year old) ACD has perfect manners. Why? Because she figured the collies were so smart they weren't going to get into as much trouble nor be as hard headed as she has learned ACDs are/can be. So she was much more lax with them than with the ACD, and she is now paying for it, having to be a bit more firm with the border collies,

A

[MaryP]

I was quite amazed to read that. I have never encountered this perception that it is necessary to be harder on border collies than other breeds. I don't think it exists here in the US. Has anybody else (folks from the sports world?) run into it?

 

I think it is an astounding misperception, and the reality is quite the opposite.

 

That has not been my observation. If anything, the border collies tend to catch on a lot quicker than the other breeds or mixes (not trying to dis' anyone's chosen breed or mix - I have them too! ) and they tend to need less encouragement to "work" for their handler than non-border collies, IME. I think border collies are great for lazy handlers like myself who like to see results quickly and that's why they are so popular with sport people. No need to beat them over the head to get them to do what you want them to do. It's just a matter of making the message clear.

[mum24dog]

Having 2 BCs and 1 non BC, I'd agree Eileen, that the opposite is true. My BCs are almost self teaching, and require much less "work" to get them to do anything. I think maybe handlers can be more demanding of BCs, I think because they're smart enough to handle the extra demand, but certainly don't require a harder approach. This is based on my experience in agility and flyball, with other than just my BCs....

 

People misinterpret the need for consistency as a need to be firm, unfortunately.

I have more leeway with my other dogs to be inconsistent than I do with my BC.

 

Pam

[Sue R]

As far as sport folks being "harder" on their border collies...I have a student (stockwork) who has had ACDs forever, brought her first ones home from Aus. 30+ years ago. She has run them in agility for some years, then got a couple of border collies. She now has 3 border collies, and the 2 older ones (ages 3 and 4-5) have some bad habits (just general manners-wise), whereas her young (2 year old) ACD has perfect manners. Why? Because she figured the collies were so smart they weren't going to get into as much trouble nor be as hard headed as she has learned ACDs are/can be. So she was much more lax with them than with the ACD, and she is now paying for it, having to be a bit more firm with the border collies,

A

That's a bit like Dan and myself - it was so easy with previous Border Collies that I didn't put the time and effort into Dan, and now I'm paying for it. I took it for granted that he'd train easily and got complacent and lazy, and not I'm having to do some things like he was a pup again.

[geonni banner]

I think this thread is a "keeper."

 

I also think a lot of differences in training techniques and philosophies have more to do with the temperament of the trainer than anything.

 

I can spend hours teaching a complex behavior for the first time. Partly because I want to know what the process is for the dog and for me. But generally I'm in the pick-the-dog-up-and-put-it-in-the-tub camp because I'm not a naturally patient person. I don't want to hurt, frighten or nag my dog, but I'm apt to chose the straight line as the shortest distance between point A and point B. (And funnily enough, that seems to be the best way for me to avoid hurting, frightening or nagging my dog.)

 

So many people seem to be terrified of the notion that in day-to-day life (as opposed to in training situations) they might show the dog that they are peeved, annoyed or furious with the dog. Not me. Anger is my friend. (It hasn't always been, mind you - but several years of therapy and hard work have made it so.) And since it is my friend, I don't get irrational when I'm angry. My dog knows that she can trust me. I have never given her reason to feel otherwise. So if I'm peeved, annoyed or even furious, my dog sees it, but she is not afraid. She may have had bad experiences in her past, in fact I'm nearly certain that she has, but one thing she's clear on is that I am someone who will not hurt or terrorize her. All this is only to illustrate that my temperament is different from that of others. But the proof is in the pudding. My dog and I work hard for each other.

 

For someone who is naturally more soft-hearted and patient, a totally different approach to training is likely to be more rewarding. And of course, every dog is different. I'll never forget my first training client. The gods sent me a nut-case Dalmation to test me. I put a choke on the dog, with the family (2 school-age kids, mom & dad) watching eagerly. I made smooching noises at the dog, gave a gentle tug on the lead and said, "C'mere Malachite!" in my happiest friendly-person voice. The dog collapsed on the ground and screeched like a banshee. (Think: puppy with its tail shut in a car door.) The family froze, and I thought, "Here ends my short and tragic career as a dog trainer."

But it didn't end. I got the dog up, convinced him that the sky was not falling, and in 10 weeks the family had a well-trained and much more well-adjusted dog. (They worked very hard with that dog - all 4 of them.)

 

And so it goes...

[MaryP]

Because she figured the collies were so smart they weren't going to get into as much trouble nor be as hard headed as she has learned ACDs are/can be. So she was much more lax with them than with the ACD, and she is now paying for it, having to be a bit more firm with the border collies,

A

 

Well, I would agree with that. There are some people who think that border collies are so smart, they will basically teach themselves. That's true, but you're probably not going to like what they decide to teach themselves.

 

If by "being harder", you mean being firm and consistent, I'd agree. But, honestly, I see this problem with all different breeds and mixes - dogs misbehaving because they can get away with it.

[mum24dog]

In my experience with puppy, family dog, and fun/beginning level agility, most folks I know just assume if it's a Border Collie, it will be the standout, star pupil in the class - smart, good at retaining, more focussed, and in a different class from most other breeds in its ability to learn and progress quickly.

 

And they assume wrongly.

A lack of focus is often the first thing to address, and then a lack of general control.

The end result can be very worthwhile but often the collies we get in class are very hard work indeed.

 

Pam

[Sue R]

And they assume wrongly.

A lack of focus is often the first thing to address, and then a lack of general control.

The end result can be very worthwhile but often the collies we get in class are very hard work indeed.

 

Pam

I have to say that, in terms of the Border Collies I have seen in the classes I have either assisted with or taken, several were out-of-control, active, excited, reactive dogs with handlers that either were not firm and consistent from puppyhood (or adoption), and the dogs had largely already written off their owner/handlers as any sort of influence in their lives. I had one I worked with that wanted nothing to do with any sort of correction, control, or limits placed on the dog - and was not willing to get firm but fair to set limits to behaviors - she got nowhere in the class and I shudder to think what their situation is now.

 

That sort of reaction was certainly not limited to the Border Collies - I saw it in Standard Poodles, Labs, Goldens, mutts, and most any kind of dog imaginable. It was a matter of an owner/handler who was not prepared (either ignorant or not interested) to properly, fairly, consistently, and appropriately train their dog. Too much of it stemmed from not understanding that puppies can be trained and need to be trained so, by the time the owner took the dog to class, it had had months (or years) of no training, poor training, or counter-productive training that needed to be dealt with. Most often, it was either a matter of folks not training a pup or an adopted dog, perhaps out of a misguided sense of being "kind" or tolerating (even encouraging) "cute" puppy behaviors that would shortly become unpleasant or even dangerous adult behaviors.

 

The dogs, Border Collies or BC crosses, that were handled by people who wanted to learn training skills and were willing to put in training time, did very well within the limits of their own personal potential. And their owners were very pleased with the nice, mannerly, friendly dogs that they helped shape.

 

Most of my experience with Border Collies is with working-bred dogs at sheepdog trials. I have very rarely seen a dog that I considered ill-mannered even though there are many who, off stock, have few commands other than a recall, a down, and a kennel-up or crate-up. I am constantly amazed at seeing numerous dogs, off lead, running and playing, meeting new dogs, and doing their dog business - without a problem in sight. It's a sight that would shock my kennel club friends who only have dogs off-lead in very controlled situations.

[juliepoudrier]

Thanks.

As I suspected, it's something many of us do without putting a name to it.

I read your post before the ETA and was trying to figure out why your agility students approach was having the opposite reaction but I understand now - I think.

 

Pam

I thought I probably should clarify the agility student thing because it was probably a bit muddled without some background information. I'll try to keep this short, but I think this explanation will make more sense to you. Those of you who train stockdogs, please forgive the oversimplification. Training on stock involves balance. Border collies are gathering dogs, and as such, they want to bring stock and hold it to the handler. This quality of being (usually**) opposite the stock to the human and moving so as to hold them in place to the human is called balance. We can train flanks because when we move around the stock, the dog will counterbalance to us. So if I move to my right, the dog will move to its right so as to stay as near opposite to me as necessary to hold the stock to me (there's a lot more to it, but this explanation will suffice for this discussion) and then I can put a name ("away to me") to that action. So the most natural place for the dog to want to be is on the other side of the stock. So say you're trying to start little outruns with the dog. You're standing on the same side of the livestock as the dog and the dog's instinct is telling it that it needs to be on the other side of the livestock. If I step into the dog and put pressure on the dog in that way, the dog is thinking how best to get to the other side of the livestock and the fact that I'm moving into the dog's space is getting the dog worried/tense because the more I crowd the dog, the harder I will make it for the dog to get to where it feels it needs to be. Because remember, if the dog is to my right and is going to go around to the right, and I am stepping to my right into the dog, I am requiring the dog to go much further around to get to balance. The usual end result is that the dog will whip out around the point of pressure I'm putting on it and then dive straight for the stock (shortest distance between two points and all that). If, however, I step to my *left* I have removed any pressure of my presence from the dog *and* I have shortened the distance the dog needs to go to get to the balance point. With a young dog, as the dog left my feet heading right, I would continue to move to my left, which would do several things. It would continue to shorten the distance the dog needed to go to get to balance and thereby encourage the dog to stay out on the circle and not come in tight on the sheep to get there faster (i.e., keep the dog in a relaxed state of mind). It would put my body pressure along the path I *don't* want the dog to take, and moving the pressure of my presence away from the dog helps to relax the dog.

 

(**I say usually because obviously dog, stock, and human aren't in a vacuum and there will be outside pressures, like the stock wanting to go to a particular location, say a barn or roll of hay, that may require the dog to be someplace other than directly opposite the handler in order to hold the stock in place to the handler.)

 

So if you have a handler leaning over the dog and waving his arm out in that same direction, he's increasing the dog's tension and he's making it more difficult for the dog to get to balance. He's also out of position to block the dog from taking the wrong path, that is, crossing over between the handler and the sheep. It's much easier to understand if you can see the whole process in action, but that's a very basic explanation.

 

Anyway, if you want to continue this part of the discussion in more detail, we can take it to PM, since this is going off on something of a tangent.

 

J.

[Root Beer]

I was quite amazed to read that. I have never encountered this perception that it is necessary to be harder on border collies than other breeds. I don't think it exists here in the US. Has anybody else (folks from the sports world?) run into it?

 

Yes, I have. Not from a lot, or even most people, but I have run into it.

[Jacks_Mom]

The owner of the clip has removed it fromYou Tube, did not get to see it but from what I hear I am glad I didn't.

[Root Beer]

I think this thread is a "keeper."

 

I also think a lot of differences in training techniques and philosophies have more to do with the temperament of the trainer than anything.

 

I concur.

 

I often hear that the training method must suit the dog. True, but only half of the whole picture. The training method must suit both the dog and handler.

[flyer]

Yes, most excellent thread. So much of what I wonder about as I plod along with my first BC's has been addressed. Such a valuable forum!!