# Training for Utility



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

We've set a goal to be ready to show in Utility by the fall. I'm trying to get out and train daily - a pain in the butt when you don't have a yard and have to set up a full utility ring each time. Ugh. I'm also trying to record daily so I can watch, critique and plan the next training session. 

Here, we're using a new technique (duration hand targeting - side of his face to my hand) to work on forging. I'll eventually drop my hand to the right of his face (no contact) and gradually move it back up to my waist. I like how it's working so far. Fast forward about 40 secs to get to the real stuff. He shot out after a squirrel and I had to call him back. D'oh!






Here's a go out:






Here's some more go outs and a display of his random lack of impulse control! :uhoh:






Just gotta keep training.....


----------



## JDandBigAm (Aug 25, 2008)

My goodness! Quiz loves to work! Training outside although a pain will sure make him solid in utility. Your new heeling technique is interesting. I like your "go out" training too where Quiz has to go beyond the gate. I tried the disc with the treat on it and Jonah took the treat and the disc, ha! Ya'll look great together.


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Wow I really love using the hand for forging. Hmm....

Also lol-ing over 'impulse control' and 'sometimes you suck'   I guess sometimes they never calm down, eh?


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Happy said:


> My goodness! Quiz loves to work! Training outside although a pain will sure make him solid in utility. Your new heeling technique is interesting. I like your "go out" training too where Quiz has to go beyond the gate. I tried the disc with the treat on it and Jonah took the treat and the disc, ha! Ya'll look great together.


Thank you. Yes, I always put the target beyond the gate. One of my pet peeves is a dog who starts slowing down early in anticipation of the turn and sit. When I have ring ropes and poles, I sometimes put it REALLY far outside the gate and turn/sit him outside the ring. With gates, I can set up the gates so that from the other end of the ring, they appear solid, but really, one is set back from the other a bit so he can snake through to the target once he gets there. I haven't bought gates yet since we only get them at indoor shows and I've actually never been to an indoor show in CA.

The heeling thing is a modified version of something Denise Fenzi does. I don't like how he's actually pushing on my hand. She conditions her dogs to simply accept her hand on their head and for them, it's comforting. Quiz is reverting back to something similar I'd taught as a trick and rather than try and un-do that, I'm just rolling with it - even though I don't like the pushing - and it seems to be working.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

GoldenSail said:


> I guess sometimes they never calm down, eh?


And he just turned SEVEN.... :bowl:


----------



## Sally's Mom (Sep 20, 2010)

I found getting a UD so much hareder than getting a CDX. I like the idea of putting the target behind the ring gate on the go out.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> The heeling thing is a modified version of something Denise Fenzi does. I don't like how he's actually pushing on my hand. She conditions her dogs to simply accept her hand on their head and for them, it's comforting. Quiz is reverting back to something similar I'd taught as a trick and rather than try and un-do that, I'm just rolling with it - even though I don't like the pushing - and it seems to be working.


That was my concern when I watched the first video that holding his head like that might encourage bumping... <- Even so I like this method better than others that I've seen.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Megora said:


> That was my concern when I watched the first video that holding his head like that might encourage bumping... <- Even so I like this method better than others that I've seen.


This isn't the best explanation of how she uses it (or how she trains it) but it sort of gets the idea going...


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Megora said:


> That was my concern when I watched the first video that holding his head like that might encourage bumping... <- Even so I like this method better than others that I've seen.


Oh... and fortunately, so far, as soon as I drop my hand, his head straightens us. I actually think it's minimizing bumping b/c it's keeping him in a better heel position rather than being forged.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Sally's Mom said:


> I found getting a UD so much hareder than getting a CDX. I like the idea of putting the target behind the ring gate on the go out.


I really shouldn't be calling him back to me after he goes to the target. In theory, all rewards should come behind him to try and prevent the turn, creep, then sit business. Sometimes I'm too lazy to hoof it out there. Bad trainer! It's one of the things I realized from watching the video. I'm really glad to finally be doing the video thing.

And yikes... yes... so many ways to fail utility! Trying not to let that scare me! :curtain:


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

Always love to watch you two working together! Such a bouncy happy boy!!

Is it my imagination?? Does he always turn to the left and sit when you give him the Quiz-SIT and turn the the right after he takes the cookie when you give him the Get-it?


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

LibertyME said:


> Always love to watch you two working together! Such a bouncy happy boy!!
> 
> Is it my imagination?? Does he always turn to the left and sit when you give him the Quiz-SIT and turn the the right after he takes the cookie when you give him the Get-it?


[email protected]@D eye! I know the left on the turn-and-sit is consistent. Not sure about the get-it. By the time he's turning, my brain is usually already calculating how much anticipation I saw (that prompted me to do a get it rather than a sit) and how I should manage my get it to sit ratio. I'll have to watch for it on future videos.


----------



## Sally's Mom (Sep 20, 2010)

Flying Quizini,
My brilliant Laney got her CD and CDX in 3 successive trials. I couldn't tell you how many attempts we had for her UD. There was always something to work on for the next time!!!


----------



## Mighty Casey and Samson's Mom (Jul 16, 2008)

I think that we have totally opposite dogs (and probably opposite training issues). Casey is Mr. Laid Back, yes, I'll saunter out there, if I really need to... I've NEVER had forging issues, and actually ENCOURAGE forging in my training!! He haS definite strengths (wHERE ARE THOSE NICE GROUP STAYS IN UTILITY?) but my main issue is to pump the guy up a LOT. My coach and I have been working hard lately on his attention when heeling IN THE RING (he is an angel any other time). This has improved a lot in recent matches. We are in our first utlity trial in February, and I am starting to wonder WHAT POSSESSED ME to enter? Experience, right??
Meanwhile, my 8 month old, Sam, is doing nicer go outs than Casey. He is convinced that there must ALWAYS be a treat out there if there EVER was one before. Can't wait for utility with this guy!! Still, Casey does obedience because he knows I want him to--he'd rather be watching Animal Planet on the 'TV, I'm sure!! That devotion counts for a lot for me.
Good luck to you and Quiz!


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Do you always put treats out for Quiz? I did initially with my go-out training but found not only did I not need them, but I am worried about having a dog that hunts for food in the ring. This is a problem a friend of mine had using food on go-outs.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

GoldenSail said:


> Do you always put treats out for Quiz? I did initially with my go-out training but found not only did I not need them, but I am worried about having a dog that hunts for food in the ring. This is a problem a friend of mine had using food on go-outs.


Not always, but we're really early in go out training. I'm using a combo of a ball or food. Today was food b/c I was getting more drive on food than the ball.

The dog that hunts for food in the ring... Is it all the time, or on a go out?


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

FlyingQuizini said:


> Not always, but we're really early in go out training. I'm using a combo of a ball or food. Today was food b/c I was getting more drive on food than the ball.
> 
> The dog that hunts for food in the ring... Is it all the time, or on a go out?


It's on a go-out. It's one of the weaknesses I've heard with that method. It make me nervous to use food that is on the ground in my training. Sure it won't happen to everyone, but it concerns me. Of course, I've heard teaching them to run to the gate can cause dogs that like to touch the gate in the ring.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Figuring out what method to use for go-outs is a decision I think about a lot in training. 

If a dog is searching for food on a go-out, that just means the dog's response to the sit command isn't strong enough. Dog should sit on command even if there's a juicy piece of steak visible to him.

Go-outs aren't that hard to train. The tricky part is like every other exercise, you have to find something that will hold up long enough to trial with over time. For many dogs that are just going to get a UD and not much beyond that, most methods of training will get the dog through. But when I'm training I'm not thinking about something that will hold up for the UD title, I'm thinking about something that will hold up after a hundred times in the ring. And I think that's where more issues with food start to pop up...most dogs that have been in the ring that many times are going to figure out that there is never going to be food at the end of a go-out in a trial. 

The pattern I see in most utility dogs that are trialed post-UD is their titling legs are fairly strong. Then once they've been in the ring for awhile and they start to realize that the aids we use in training aren't there in the ring utility starts to fall apart. Then the trainers work really hard to pull it all together again and look for new methods. That usually works for awhile, maybe even years, and then something will fall apart again. And when it falls apart this time it takes a lot more work, thought, and time to fix it. I see it happen over and over again.

So back to go-out training. Problem I see with food is it's never going to be there in a real trial and the dog is going to figure that out at some point. Same thing for a retrieve. The problem I see with a touch based go-out is I see many dogs who don't find the touch as rewarding and don't have as much drive to go-out as they do to sit. But the benefit is you can always have the dog still do the touch in a trial. You'll never be able to have a treat or toy out there.

When I trained Annabel for utility (never trialed her though), I trained her with a nose touch. Conner was trained to retrieve a food pouch tucked into the stantion. So it was a combination of a retrieve and food reward. I do like the method and it held up fairly well...he went about 50 trials before he started pulling up short occasionally. Colby I started with the food pouch and changed to a paw touch. With him I knew I would be plenty happy with a UD on a Lhasa no matter the score, so I always let him touch the gate before the sit, even in a trial. I am thinking that with Flip I am going to teach him a couple of different things to do and he'll have to wait until he's out there to know if he's going to touch, retrieve, sit, etc. 

Anyway, that's my rambling thoughts on go-outs and the problem of long term showing versus training just to get the title. Obviously my kids are testing today :uhoh:


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

I am with Jodie -- do not like target or food-based lure go outs -- they fall apart quick and are a huge crutch ----
I WALK IN and feed from my hand through the gate to reward the dog and when in training, that is on 95% of the go-outs. I rarely send over a jump right away and NEVER would call the dog in from a go out. Fisher learned quickly that since *I* was walking in with the treat to feed through the gate -- no need to come to me for it, he would back himself up against the gate as I walked in!
To me -- the dog is SUPPOSED to KNOW his job is to run TO THE GATE...not to a random target somewhere near or beyond the gate. Rather than putting the target beyond the gate (which to me seems...um...really a pointless thing to teach a dog) why not back the gate up and make his go outs longer that way? You will ALWAYS have a ring gate or barrier of some sort and the dog will never be expected to go beyond it, so why teach that? Back up the gate or yourself and do super long go-outs. IMO a dog that understands that reaching the gate is the goal, is one who understands the exercise.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I know of a few people that teach go outs past the gates. Most are using a field theory of "you run straight ahead until I tell you to stop." If you can teach that I don't think it's a problem, my issue with it is I'll never be able to do that in a trial, or rarely even in a match.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

oh and I should add I'm not purposefully ignoring talking about the posted videos, I just can't watch you tube from work. Look forward to watching them later!


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Loisiana said:


> I know of a few people that teach go outs past the gates. Most are using a field theory of "you run straight ahead until I tell you to stop." If you can teach that I don't think it's a problem, my issue with it is I'll never be able to do that in a trial, or rarely even in a match.


Exactly. And that's called a blind in field work. In utility they will ALWAYS run at the gate, never farther. If you teach him to run to the gate he will not wonder when you are going to stop him (anticipate) b/c you will always stop him as he reaches the gate, not before, not after.
The nice thing about obedience (as opposed to field work) is the scenario is ALWAYS the same. The ring is the same size, the gate is the same distance, the jumps are the same height -- so why change it up and ask for something different in training. Proofing is one thing but teaching two different things? Well just a different way of going at it that does work for some.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Assorted thoughts based on various comments:

* I like the idea of making the ring longer.

* I also think that sniffing for food on a go out is a compliance issue with the sit. For that reason, I'm not worried about using the food. My goal is to make the turn and sit resistant to the distraction of food out there, etc.

* I'm not a huge fan of this method. Quiz is the first dog I'm teaching a go-out to and this is what the group of people I train with use, and I don't have confident knowledge of another method. I'm also not worried about whether or not it will hold up over 100 shows b/c honestly, I have to realize that Quiz is seven and I'm starting graduate school in the fall. As much as I'd like to campaign him to a UDX (and might be able to, who knows) I also realize that he may be a UD dog who shows occasionally after that. We had probably a four year stretch where I was SOOO busy running a business, we didn't train much at all; just doodled to keep the novice and open work running smoothly.

*I commented earlier that I thought all the reward should be coming from me w/o the dog running back to me. I'm not sure the purpose of the run back to me. It's what I was taught in early stages. I definitely want to change that up so I always run to the dog and reward.

*I plan on rarely chaining the go out with the jump in training. I'm thinking this will help minimize turn and sit creeping in anticipation of being sent to a jump.

_______

Now - those of you who don't like the placed target, how do you train it?


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I am very lucky that ALL of our shows use gates with stanchions. Which means over 95% of our go-outs are to gates. We very occasionally have one side of the ring have a wall instead of gating, but that is very rare. Around here even if one side of the ring does have a wall they will still usually put up gates. So all of my ititial go-out training is done to something up and down - a stanchion, a support pole, poles in the fence (we do a lot of fence go-outs). That is the target. And then after hundreds of successfull go outs I find the dog doesn't have trouble appyling the idea that you are just running to whatever is straight in front of him, so when we do get blank walls it's not a problem.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Using food on the go-outs is not an issue as long as you do not maintain the same pattern of rewarding. By this I mean that on every go out you use food in training and at matches. Once the dog has the general idea of the go out and does not need to see the food be placed you need to vary it. Some times you plant the treat on the first & second go-out. Other times you plant it on just the first and then follow the dog out and treat at the gate. Sometimes you follow out the first and plant for the second. Then once that is working you plant on the first then on the second treat after the jump. Next time treat after the first jump and plant for the second go-out. Finally sometimes you "jackpot" after both go-outs and jumps are finished. Just keep mixing it up and keep them guessing. I am doing this with Oriana at this time and I am pleased with the progress.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I was thinking we should probably mention for those that haven't trained for utility, the end goal is not to sit the dog at the end of the ring. It is to sit the dog 20 feet past the jumps, which ends up being five feet from the end of the ring in an appropriately sized ring. I'm mentioning that because that's what makes maintaining go-outs a challenge. For most training methods for go-outs, it becomes a sort of reverse DOR. On a DOR, you are telling your dog, "come to me and front until/unless I tell you to drop." And on a go-out you are telling your dog "go to the other end of the ring and ____ until/unless I tell you to sit. It's a very similar confusion that occurs between the two exercises. 

So the dog starts anticipating a sit. On the other hand, if you were to always send your dog all the way out to the ring barrier, that anticipation shouldn't occur in most dogs. So that five feet what causes the challenge over time for most dogs.

Sorry to write so much. Go-out training is something I love to discuss because I find very very few trainers and dogs that can maintain perfect go-outs all the time. So I'm always looking for new and different ways to train it.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> the end goal is not to sit the dog at the end of the ring. It is to sit the dog 20 feet past the jumps, which ends up being five feet from the end of the ring in an appropriately sized ring.


I was actually wondering.... 

The furthest we've gotten with training the go-outs is the go-out part (the treat on the colored paper plate). He isn't even sitting yet. So a lot of this is greek to me. But very interesting. 

At class, it seems like the go-out sends the dog to the start of the last mat. Similar to where recalls and stays are set up. I was wondering if training your dog with the same sight picture all the time helps them go out far enough... simply because dogs are creatures of habit.


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Is using a box for them to run to and sit considered target training as well? That is what I am doing as per Janice Gunn. Right now it is white, thin pvc, but will be grey and not visible.

As far as the searching for food it's just a fear, as is using lots of food in general. I think the dog was searching for food before the sit command is given and is probably often practiced.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

If you have a 4 foot cross mat along the end of the ring, then you want to stop them just before they get to the mat. For me the timing is the tricky part. AKC has really emphasized in the last couple of years to judges about scoring dogs that don't stop in the appropriate But you can't always count on that. Sometimes there's no cross mat, or it starts behind the gate, or a foot away from the gate, or no matting at all. I do think the dogs learn to use the jumps to help guide them straight across the ring.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

Megora said:


> I was actually wondering....
> 
> The furthest we've gotten with training the go-outs is the go-out part (the treat on the colored paper plate). He isn't even sitting yet. So a lot of this is greek to me. But very interesting.
> 
> At class, it seems like the go-out sends the dog to the start of the last mat. Similar to where recalls and stays are set up. I was wondering if training your dog with the same sight picture all the time helps them go out far enough... simply because dogs are creatures of habit.


I am sure you are doing it in class but for others that are new to utility if you are doing go outs from more than half way across the ring be sure you have your jumps set up as if you were going to jump the dog. Adding them later can create a different picture and big problems for some dogs.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

AmbikaGR said:


> I am sure you are doing it in class but for others that are new to utility if you are doing go outs from more than half way across the ring be sure you have your jumps set up as if you were going to jump the dog. Adding them later can create a different picture and big problems for some dogs.


Yup. That's why training for utility is such a pain in the butt. You really do need a full ring, or at least two sides of a ring. If I'm in a hurry, I'll set an L-shape of a ring. That way I can do go outs and gloves and have the jumps in the middle to maintain the desired picture.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

AmbikaGR said:


> Using food on the go-outs is not an issue as long as you do not maintain the same pattern of rewarding. By this I mean that on every go out you use food in training and at matches. Once the dog has the general idea of the go out and does not need to see the food be placed you need to vary it. Some times you plant the treat on the first & second go-out. Other times you plant it on just the first and then follow the dog out and treat at the gate. Sometimes you follow out the first and plant for the second. Then once that is working you plant on the first then on the second treat after the jump. Next time treat after the first jump and plant for the second go-out. Finally sometimes you "jackpot" after both go-outs and jumps are finished. Just keep mixing it up and keep them guessing. I am doing this with Oriana at this time and I am pleased with the progress.


That's what I was planning to do. We're just now at the point where I let him see me place it, but we do something else before the go out. Even now, I don't always let him go > get it. A lot of times it's go > sit > I walk in and feed > we do something else > another go-out > get it.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

GoldenSail said:


> Is using a box for them to run to and sit considered target training as well? That is what I am doing as per Janice Gunn. Right now it is white, thin pvc, but will be grey and not visible.
> 
> As far as the searching for food it's just a fear, as is using lots of food in general. I think the dog was searching for food before the sit command is given and is probably often practiced.


To me, yes, the box is a target. I used our signals box in some early, early training where I wasn't seriously attempting to train go-outs, but was just "doodling" a little bit. Box worked well to get a complete 180 degree turn on the sit. He was very clearly targeting to the box.

As for a dog searching for food before the sit command... that's a failure to properly mark, IMO. If Quiz was wondering around searching for food, I'd drop him, run out to the target, show it to him, tease him with it, not let him get it and set up for another trial.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

One thing I never ever do is let them see me put something out at the go-out spot. I want them to be able to find where they need to go without me. If that means standing one foot away then that's how close we'll be but I always make them find the spot themselves.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

FlyingQuizini said:


> As for a dog searching for food before the sit command... that's a failure to properly mark, IMO.


I don't understand how that's a failure to mark. I can see it as either a dog ignoring the sit command or the handler giving the sit command too late. How is it failure to mark?


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Loisiana said:


> One thing I never ever do is let them see me put something out at the go-out spot. I want them to be able to find where they need to go without me. If that means standing one foot away then that's how close we'll be but I always make them find the spot themselves.


I like that theory better; it's something that rings in my head from some training we did six years ago with John Rogerson. 

With him being the first dog that I've trained at this level, I finally decided I had to go with what the instructor I train with has used with success for countless dogs -- work through the program that way and then decide what changes I'd like to make for future dogs. (Or make little tweaks here and there along the way.)


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

FlyingQuizini said:


> I like that theory better; it's something that rings in my head from some training we did six years ago with John Rogerson.
> 
> With him being the first dog that I've trained at this level, I finally decided I had to go with what the instructor I train with has used with success for countless dogs -- work through the program that way and then decide what changes I'd like to make for future dogs. (Or make little tweaks here and there along the way.)



Much better approach then the one I used for years. I would read a lot of training material and listen to what EVERYBODY had to say. Almost like "flavor of the week". Talk about confusing the dog, never mind the handler. For the first time I am training with a top proven trainer and doing everything she says. Well at least honestly trying as old habits are SO hard to break! :doh:


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Okay, how I trained Fisher on go outs and how I've started Slater. 
For the first lesson. Put up one gate. Sit dog about 3 feet from the middle of the gate, you by their side. Tell them to wait. Walk up to the middle of the gate and tap on the gate at the dog's eye level. "What's this? What's here?" Make dog curious. Return to dog, tell them "Go out!" and do the left hand motion thingy toward the gate. Naturally curious dog walks on his own and checks out the gate you just made a fuss over. Instantly follow him and make a big praise party out of it, and feed him THROUGH THE GATE in the same spot you tapped. Walk dog back to the 3 feet away spot and repeat.
Repeat about a billion times, very gradually backing up. This a slow process. Also gradually start repeating the sends without you walking to tap the gate first. Start asking for the sit before treating, then as the dog reaches the gate. EVERY TIME follow the dog out or wait for him to sit, and go in and treat through the gate. 
You increase the distance slowly, a naturally biddable dog loves this game, all he has to do is run and wait for you to give him a treat. 
So what if he doesn't go all the way or goes to the wrong place? Go get dog, take him by the collar in one hand and a "helping hand" behind the butt with the other and usher him quickly to the correct go out spot. Praise praise but no food. Return to your send spot, you walk and tap the gate, repeat send. If he is going all the way but not in the middle, you can use dowels or poles on the ground to make a guide where the middle is. 
I took MONTHS to teach Fisher this as a youngster. We had really solid go outs all through getting UD. When I went back a few years later and started training for UDX, we ran into two problems. One was not going all the way on the first go out. I tackled this one head on by practicing go outs ALL over -- taking my one gate everywhere -- and a go out was the FIRST thing we did. Hard. I shortened it up initially so he would be successful the FIRST send. Do not get in the habit of setting them up and correcting on every first send, because they fall into the habit of that's how it's supposed to be. Change something until the dog is successful. Once we got over the hump I went to practicing really long go outs, both the gate extended and my send point extended. Once that was hammered out Fisher started going all the way but crooked, ending up too far to the right. I put out a pole on the ground against the gate that was my "limit." If he sat to the right of the pole, I went out and got him and put him on the other side of the pole. It became very black and white -- right side of pole not allowed, sit on the left of the pole. Only a few sessions and he got out of the habit of going to the right. I like this method because it is only you, the dog, and the gate, it DOES put a lot of responsibility on the dog but that means he is less likely to break down if ring conditions change.
BTW I think the "new" rule of the dog stopping 3-5 feet from the gate is STUPID. It is penalizing fast dogs and penalizing dogs who are trying hard to do a go out. It penalizes handlers with poor depth of vision. Why don't they instead penalize dogs who touch the gate (very black and white) and/or hesitate after being told to sit (still a judgement call but it addresses what they are trying to police with the current rule in a much more effective way).


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

it's not that it's a new rule (and I see you put it in quotes so I guess you know that?), it's just that so many judges were getting lax about not scoring it that AKC reminded all the judges that it was supposed to be scored. Personally I like it because it's what makes the exercise more challenging. But I do find it difficult sometimes to judge the distance if there isn't something to mark it for me, so that's when I have go ringside and find five feet from the end of the ring and make a mental note of it. And while some judges will still let 3 feet from the gate go, it's really too close and many will score it. I'm finding it's less likely to get scored if you stop the dog a foot sooner (at 19 feet) than a foot later (21 feet)


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

Loisiana said:


> I don't understand how that's a failure to mark. I can see it as either a dog ignoring the sit command or the handler giving the sit command too late. How is it failure to mark?


I was picturing a dog searching his way out to the other end of the ring -- not running to the "target area" with purpose b/c he was too busy searching for food.

But if it's a dog who runs with purpose to the designated area and ignores the sit b/c he's busy looking for food, yes, that's a failure to comply with sit.

I'm guessing I had a different mental picture. But I have seen some dogs do what I'm describing.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Oh, I don't think I've seen that one. I was thinking about when a dog goes out to where is food is usually put and then starts looking around for it when he doesn't see it. 

I have seen a tracking dog track the stewards path to the article pile, and then continue tracking the steward's path right out of the ring!


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

Thanks for sharing your videos! I've returned to being diligent about video-ing and then actually watching the videos. It's a pain but sure does make a difference.

My understanding is that the biggest advantage to a 'greater than average' go out/send is that if you have increased speed...the dog is less likely to drift. But if the extra space doesn't increase speed....that part of it at least won't be impacted by the size change.

We've been using a foot target to go to (per morton and cecelie!), though we did a little with marking/sitting at gates/barrels/posts. The morphology of the behavior didn't look as nice to me so we haven't done a lot of it. It was highly amusing today when Griffin offered a mark-go-sit right in front of a person today. We have never done that with a human before (and never intend to....). 

More videos and commentary/discussion!


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

RedDogs said:


> Thanks for sharing your videos! I've returned to being diligent about video-ing and then actually watching the videos. It's a pain but sure does make a difference.
> 
> My understanding is that the biggest advantage to a 'greater than average' go out/send is that if you have increased speed...the dog is less likely to drift. But if the extra space doesn't increase speed....that part of it at least won't be impacted by the size change.
> 
> ...


You know I love Morton and Cecelie! I was kicking myself for not realizing Clicker Expo was local again this year. Not b/c I wanted to go (well, I did, but the Whites are no longer affiliated with Karen Pryor and if I'm gonna pop THAT kind of money, I want to see ALL my faves there!) but b/c I wanted to try and arrange to host the Kost's locally for an obedience seminar. Gahhhh!

I put a video of fronts and finishes on my FB page. I'll link it here, too. It's funny at the end b/c he nearly takes out the camera mount on a retrieve!


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

My dog takes out the camera ALL THE TIME. 

There's a rumor that they'll be doing a seminar in TX in March.... I was registered for expo, but dropped that and if the seminar happens I'll be making the 16 hour drive for the weekend. I love them so much...seriously the #1 reason I signed up for expo and #1 reason I regret not being able to go.

I think you should come out here for a visit to see the White's in April....


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

RedDogs said:


> My dog takes out the camera ALL THE TIME.
> 
> There's a rumor that they'll be doing a seminar in TX in March.... I was registered for expo, but dropped that and if the seminar happens I'll be making the 16 hour drive for the weekend. I love them so much...seriously the #1 reason I signed up for expo and #1 reason I regret not being able to go.
> 
> I think you should come out here for a visit to see the White's in April....


Oh wow... that's cool. Thanks for the heads up. I'll have to look into the possibility of them extending their trip and coming to CA on the front or back of whatever they have going in Texas. I had heard a couple years ago that Cecelie wasn't likely to even continue with Expo b/c she hates to fly. Glad that isn't the case. 

I'm planning on hosting the Whites in Los Angeles this year, just not sure of the topic yet. I just had the pleasure of working extensively with Steve on an article for WDJ. He and Jen are both awesome peeps!


----------



## RedDogs (Jan 30, 2010)

FlyingQuizini said:


> Oh wow... that's cool. Thanks for the heads up. I'll have to look into the possibility of them extending their trip and coming to CA on the front or back of whatever they have going in Texas. I had heard a couple years ago that Cecelie wasn't likely to even continue with Expo b/c she hates to fly. Glad that isn't the case.


I tried that... but it doesn't sound like they'll extend... and that the one might not even happen. B ut if they end up in CA and not TX... I don't know what to do... CA is closer than Norway...but I couldn't take my dog and I REALLY would love to work him!


----------

