# Training Methods



## jdavisryan (Jan 28, 2018)

I use positive reinforcement methods when teaching new skills, but I’m not opposed to using a verbal or occasional leash correction when a skill is acquired and the command is understood, but not offered. Woody is a happily independent dog and doesn’t have as much desire to please that our previous dogs had. At age two, he’s definitely mellowing our and has bonded with me closely. Now I’m using more praise and play to reinforce when we train, but from about 9 to 23 months he needed a no-nonsense approach. That was a learning curve for me as well as I’m not typically an authoritarian type, but it was in his best interest that I toughen up a bit. I think the training style should be tailored to the dogs temperament and needs at the time.
Edited to add that Woody is not a competitive obedience dog, although that was our goal before Covid shut down our training club. Our training is focused on the acquiring the skills to maybe compete someday, but mostly to have a well-mannered dog who is a pleasure to live with and will behave when he’s out with us.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Teach, teach and teach again, every command and concept. 
Challenge the dog while keeping him confident and successful. 
Never compete in training. 
Recognize that little things make a big difference, for instance sitting on command in the house with no distractions compared to sitting on command outside with lots of smells and interesting things around. Then jump to a park with lots of people, dogs, noise etc.
Praise for obedience and correct for disobedience and just enough of either to get the desired response. Too much of either will dilute the meaning and effect.
Know your dog, you have to be able to read the difference between mistakes and disobedience. 
Always simplify a lesson if a dog is having trouble. There has to be a clear path to success for the dog to choose.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

I'm wondering if correcting for bad behavior would have the dog learn to do the bad behavior when your not around?


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Rex the Rat said:


> I'm wondering if correcting for bad behavior would have the dog learn to do the bad behavior when your not around?


No


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

No? Mind explaining?


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

My observation of "Positive only training".
Stuff the dog full of treats and endlessly praise for everything. When the dog disobeys, recite a long list of excuses until the dog complies, or not, then give more treats and praise, maybe even a "click".


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Retrievers like to work and be challenged in training. Ask anyone that has trained a dog to a high level of performance. They feel pride in their success and the reward they want most is to do it all again. 
Much of the behavior issues people have with Goldens is due to boredom and frustration. Going for walks on a leash is not enough, retrievers want to work and be challenged both physically and mentally.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

SRW said:


> Stuff the dog full of treats and endlessly praise for everything. When the dog disobeys, recite a long list of excuses until the dog complies, or not, then give more treats and praise, maybe even a "click".


If the dog does not comply it would be meaningless to reward the dog for doing nothing. If the dog does not listen to a command you would make sure the dog knows what you want and does what you ask before rewarding, you would not however, correct the dog for not listening since there can be so many reasons why the dog didn't comply (for example distracted, didn't know the command, etc.) and thinking that its out of spite would just be people being anthropomorphic. If the dog does a bad behavior however, positive reinforcement based trainers wouldn't just ignore the dog they would give the dog an alternative, acceptable thing to do instead.



SRW said:


> Retrievers like to work and be challenged in training. Ask anyone that has trained a dog to a high level of performance. They feel pride in their success and the reward they want most is to do it all again.
> Much of the behavior issues people have with Goldens is due to boredom and frustration. Going for walks on a leash is not enough, retrievers want to work and be challenged both physically and mentally.


I completely agree with everything you said here.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Rex the Rat said:


> I personally use (BALANCED) training where you set the dog up to succeed and if the dog does not comply, figure out the root of the problem and work through it, whether that's because the dog does not know the command, cannot work through distractions, is too stressed, aroused, etc.


I literally quoted what you said in your post with 1 adjustment. 

What you describe is how I train. Except I DO correct the dogs. Where people get hung up about "correcting" their dog is (1) they think every correction is a punishment and (2) they think every correction is hard on the dog and associate with the kinds of stuff they might have seen on Cesar Millan. Except that is not accurate.

Additionally, when people say they are "balanced" trainers, the implication is halfsies (50/50). But for me, balance depends on the dog. It might be only 1%. It might even be less than 1%. My dogs are pretty soft and eager to please - like most goldens. The type of correction you use should be based on the dog. And with my dogs, the corrections I use are of the type that most people might not notice at all. 

The below is a quicky training video I did a few years ago with my now 8 year old. I corrected my dog a few times in this video. Stopping + withholding rewards/praise and repeating an exercise or "Setup" - that is a correction. 






Do I use more noticeable/serious corrections? YES.

We don't have a fenced yard, but the dogs stay inside the yard. If they ever cross that line and go out into the street - you betcha boots they get dragged home by the scruff and pressure is only released once they cross the home boundary. <= That might cause a tender hearted type to shudder, but (1) my scruff shake hauling of my dog is not as bad as zapping my dog in the head area like people do with their invisible fencing collars and (2) very many dogs who take off running get hit by cars. The danger to a dog that tries going for a run merits a correction that never needs to be repeated. 

With my dogs the only dog who got the big scruff shake hauling back home was my Jacks when he was younger. He learned his boundary so well from that experience that he helped train my Bertie (the baby in the video above). And Bertie trained his sons to stay on his property.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

Megora said:


> Stopping + withholding rewards/praise and repeating an exercise


Yes, this would be considered negative punishment and is commonly used in positive reinforcement training, for example if your dog has fun jumping on you or nipping you, you would walk away and therefore take away the object of fun.


Megora said:


> If they ever cross that line and go out into the street - you betcha boots they get dragged home by the scruff and pressure is only released once they cross the home boundary.


But if they anticipate you coming and being dragged by the scruff wouldn't there be a danger of them running away from you when they are over the line when they see you coming?


Megora said:


> very many dogs who take off running get hit by cars. The danger to a dog that tries going for a run merits a correction that never needs to be repeated.


The dog can still learn not to cross the boundary without being corrected, and by using rewards (whether it be treats or a game of tug) you can have your dog love to not not cross the boundary. You can train your dogs not cross by having them sit every time they reach the border, then you can throw a treat or a ball to the other side and tell them 'leave it', you can then tell them to stay while you retrieve the ball and toy.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

*But if they anticipate you coming and being dragged by the scruff wouldn't there be a danger of them running away from you when they are over the line when they see you coming?*

Depends on the trainer. If you are crap at training your dog and do not communicate well, you might end up with a dog BLOWING YOU OFF as it plays "keep away" games. 

Follow lost dog groups and you see how many - especially those kept in fenced yards and on invisible fencing - end up getting smashed by a car and die alone out there on the side of the road. 

You can play with rewards all you want, but show me the proof that rewards alone help train a dog in those situations where it is life or death. 

Taking off running is a bigger reward for a real sporting breed dog than any high value treat that you might be waving around as you go panting after your running dog. Keep that in mind.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

I completely understand what you mean, dogs, especially with high prey drive, are nearly unstoppable. I heard of a case where someones dog with an _electric fence, _saw something it wanted and dashed right over the boundary line and ultimately passed. But if you think about it, what would your dog prioritize more, not getting corrected or the satisfaction of the hunt? If you start by teaching your dog that ignoring something is way more rewarding then chasing it, you wouldn't even need to worry that your dog would dash to chase something. If you show your dog that all the interesting stuff happens on one side of the border then it wouldn't consider going to the other.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Rex the Rat said:


> If the dog does not listen to a command you would make sure the dog knows what you want and does what you ask before rewarding, you would not however, correct the dog for not listening since there can be so many reasons why the dog didn't comply


Never correct a dog for not knowing what to do.


SRW said:


> Teach, teach and teach again, every command and concept.


I would and have corrected a dog for not listening. Focus on the handler is a fundamental requirement for all training. I could always come up with a reason/excuse why the dog did not comply. If the command is not known that's my fault for not teaching. If the dog knows to sit on a whistle but would rather chase a rabbit across the road, it is again my fault when he is lying dead under the wheel of a truck.

Teaching a retriever to be something he is not doesn't interest me.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Rex the Rat said:


> I completely understand what you mean, dogs, especially with high prey drive, are nearly unstoppable. I heard of a case where someones dog with an _electric fence, _saw something it wanted and dashed right over the boundary line and ultimately passed. But if you think about it, what would your dog prioritize more, not getting corrected or the satisfaction of the hunt? If you start by teaching your dog that ignoring something is way more rewarding then chasing it, you wouldn't even need to worry that your dog would dash to chase something. If you show your dog that all the interesting stuff happens on one side of the border then it wouldn't consider going to the other.


My dogs are border trained and they are trained to stay close. No matter what's out there, no matter what's higher value, etc. 






I hear a lot of people talking an awful lot about training their dogs, but unless they can do everything they talk about and they tout a method that is widely used with success - it's just talk.


----------



## Tagrenine (Aug 20, 2019)

I used to be what I thought was "purely positive" until I realized my idea of purely positive was not so. I still used verbal corrections and thus I was not a positive trainer. 

I do use clickers and other positive training for shaping behaviors and trick training. I always start with treats and continue that without correction until I am confident the dog understands what is being asked. I have employed jackpots, variable-ratio scheduling, and such to get a dog willing to comply every time.

BUT, some dogs require different work. I have started watching how those with exceptionally hard dogs train them, following and learning from other trainers and taking bits and pieces of their methods and understanding how they work. We have Border Collies. When we train them on stock, we use pressure. Applying the paddle pressure tells the dog to back off the stock and slow down. Lifting the paddle pressure tells the dog they are okay and can continue what they're doing. 

Watching people train their dogs in bitesports, those dogs THRIVE with balanced training. One trainer who's articles I read talks about producing these dogs for the IGP ring and police force. Most of these dogs are primarily toy motivated and the entire sport becomes a game. However, timing and response is critical and these dogs have to "out" instantly and without hesitation. They cannot return to the handler for treats. So correction based training tells these dogs what is expected of them and to comply when told. They do get rewarded by biting the sleeve again if allowed.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

Megora said:


> I hear a lot of people talking an awful lot about training their dogs, but unless they can do everything they talk about and they tout a method that is widely used with success - it's just talk.


Are you saying I'm bluffing? Its obviously hard to trust anyone you talk to online when they can't show you real proof, and in reality anyone can point to "success stories" on either side of the argument and say "see? it works!" Also, positive reinforcement training is very commonly used, in many parts of the world and with great success. Its been proven that both balanced training _and_ r+ training works if the trainer/owner knows what they're doing but if its possible to not have to correct the dog wouldn't that be preferable?

In case you still want proof:







SRW said:


> Focus on the handler is a fundamental requirement for all training.


Cant you teach a focus command like 'look at me'?


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Rex the Rat said:


> Are you saying I'm bluffing?


No, I'm just saying that I know dogs enough to know that bribing a dog to stay close vs training him to stay close - results vary on the one side and vary less with the other side. 

Hopefully, training a dog to stay close and never take off running towards the borders and over.... that's all done without any specific commands or corrections. Or perhaps you only need to call your dog's name as a reminder and that's it.

But if your dog crosses the line - what do you do then? Especially if he associates running across the line with only positives and exciting things? 

You made the comment above that if a dog takes off running and thinks he's going to get corrected, he may play evasive games to avoid being corrected? 

How about a dog that has no correction when caught after he's had a lot of fun running around visiting the neighbors and is just rewarded when he's brought home again. What does he remember? Will the rewards when being brought home again deter him from taking off running even sooner next time? That's the thing you need to consider. And many people respond to a dog getting loose and becoming increasingly untrustworthy offleash.... to never letting that dog be off leash. And then that dog who is never off leash has a huge party on those very rare occasions that he gets loose off leash. 

Most positive only people that I know... they never take their dogs off leash if there is the slightest suggestion of a high value situation beyond their control. This summer as an example, many obedience classes were moved outside because of the C virus. I know of 2-3 people who are positive only trainers who pulled dogs out of off leash classes because they could not trust their dogs outside off leash.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

Megora said:


> I know dogs enough to know that bribing a dog to stay close vs training him to stay close - results vary on the one side and vary less with the other side.


Bribing is trying to persuade, rewarding is about motivation. By rewarding your dog to stay close, you are showing him that it is much better to be near you. While training you wouldn't have to correct the dog because you would set the dog up for success, the dog shouldn't even have to consider leaving your side. If your dog refuses to listen you shouldn't be letting your dog off leash near a busy street until it can follow a command or ignore a distraction reliably, whether you are using corrections in your training, or rewards, it goes both ways.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Rex the Rat said:


> Bribing is trying to persuade, rewarding is about motivation. By rewarding your dog to stay close, you are showing him that it is much better to be near you. While training you wouldn't have to correct the dog because you would set the dog up for success, the dog shouldn't even have to consider leaving your side. If your dog refuses to listen you shouldn't be letting your dog off leash near a busy street until it can follow a command or ignore a distraction reliably, whether you are using corrections in your training, or rewards, it goes both ways.


OK - but be aware that there ARE people who increasingly balk at doing stuff with their dogs, balk about letting their dogs off leash, etc... because layer by layer they add on the excuses. And they got stupid little dogs who have no freedom at all - and owners full of excuses why.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

Yes, I agree, there are definitely people who restrict their dogs way too much because what? because they are afraid? or because they just don't care enough to do the hard work it takes for some dogs to get the freedom they deserve, I've seen it before and its so sad.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

By the way, do you have a golden retriever that you are training in obedience?


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

Not currently


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Megora said:


> OK - but be aware that there ARE people who increasingly balk at doing stuff with their dogs, balk about letting their dogs off leash, etc... because layer by layer they add on the excuses. And they got stupid little dogs who have no freedom at all - and owners full of excuses why.


And they buy retrievers, then spend years trying to dumb them down. 
Why don't they just get Miniature Schnauzers?


----------



## CAROLINA MOM (May 12, 2009)

There are different training methods, you may not like them or agree with them, but please be respectful to each others methods, viewpoints and opinions.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

CAROLINA MOM said:


> There are different training methods, you may not like them or agree with them, but please be respectful to each others methods, viewpoints and opinions.


I mean no disrespect to others. At the same time I have little tolerance for those who disrespect the breed.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

SRW said:


> And they buy retrievers, then spend years trying to dumb them down.
> Why don't they just get Miniature Schnauzers?


Ha.... people who own/train/handle that breed and other similar ones are worse than the others at making excuses for not socializing, training, managing, etc - their dogs.

I know somebody with yorkies who has the top (or one of the top) obedience dogs in the country. And I've seen her work with her dogs. It re-establishes some respect for that breed. Whereas, a lot of people out there have given up even potty training these dogs. This is a trainer where I literally do not know where she is on the "spectrum" (positive vs old school training methods). I have to ask her sometime - because I really can't tell just watching most of the time. Her dogs do not require noticeable corrections.

The thing that bothers me is people get goldens and expect a slow and lazy dog. And then when they have a lot of dog (surprise, sporting breed!), they put pretty harsh tools on these dogs like "gentle leaders" and whatnot to make that dog waddle dully at their sides...  Saddest thing.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

CAROLINA MOM said:


> There are different training methods, you may not like them or agree with them, but please be respectful to each others methods, viewpoints and opinions.


I too never meant any disrespect when disagreeing with other peoples opinion, and in fact I'm glad the people who participated had since I really felt like I learned a lot from from everybody's viewpoints.


----------



## Rex the Rat (Sep 23, 2020)

Megora said:


> The thing that bothers me is people get goldens and expect a slow and lazy dog.


Everyone expects the best and gets the worst and they don't know who to blame so they blame the dog, its terribly sad.


----------



## GrandmaToGoldens (Jul 2, 2019)

I first competed in obedience in 1976, and first instructed at an obedience clubs in 1978. Honestly, despite the massive changes in training methodology, I haven’t seen much change in the proportion of pet owners at training clubs who graduate to the top classes, I think that’s because, whatever the method, the keys to success are timing and “reading” your dog.
My current dog is a Brittany (similar to a working-line Golden Retriever in energy and personality) and I’ve used 99% positive methods to train her. She entered and won her first obedience and Rally trials at around 8 months old and was CDX, RM before her 3rd birthday - also Ch. Despite COVID disruptions, she’s entered for her first UD trials next month - around her 4th birthday.
I rarely take her into training classes but I did so yesterday, at a club that promotes heavily correction-based training methods. I did this because I wanted to practice signals-only heeling with the instructor calling the sits, stands, downs and turns, but I also took the opportunity to practice out-of-sight stays while the other handlers stayed closer to their dogs. Each of the other dogs in the class broke from the stays at least once, running around the field or playing with each other. My (positively trained) dog stayed in position throughout.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

GrandmaToGoldens said:


> I first competed in obedience in 1976, and first instructed at an obedience clubs in 1978. Honestly, despite the massive changes in training methodology, I haven’t seen much change in the proportion of pet owners at training clubs who graduate to the top classes, I think that’s because, whatever the method, the keys to success are timing and “reading” your dog.


I agree in part, however - I do not necessarily agree that there has not been damage to dog training as relating to sports. 

I've been training since the 90's. 

I started training at a time when obedience trials were as crowded as conformation shows with both spectators and exhibitors. 

I started training at a time when there was a definite connection between conformation and obedience - with majority of the dogs showing in both areas and the biggest trainers at the time competing in both sports. There were no extreme ends at the time because people were attempting to breed for both sports vs focusing only on one.

I started training at a time when similar to all of the people who currently get CGC's on their dogs..... people got CD's on their dogs. It was a given that if you continued training your dogs past puppy class, you went on and got a CD on them too. 

I started training at a time when agility was just starting out and getting attention from a lot of trainers.

I started training BEFORE AKC changed registration rules. 

Oh yeah, I started training before K9Data took off (and let's be honest, a lot of us didn't always have the internet - I certainly didn't). 

What has happened since then? 

People switched over to pet training classes which the way I look at it - it's like swimming in a bog. You have no future there if everything you train is just tricks and heavily reliant on constantly vocal motivation, physical motivation, and food and toys. 

I don't particularly care what training methods people use, but for me - you have to have big goals to keep you in the game. And most places where people train, as well as their instructors - there's a very low ceiling. Like ground level. <= This is why there is such a turnover in classes. As in people not putting more than 4-6 weeks into obedience classes with their dogs before changing their focus to something else. This when they should at least put in 2 years just to produce a well trained and well socialized dog.


----------



## GrandmaToGoldens (Jul 2, 2019)

Megora said:


> I agree in part, however - I do not necessarily agree that there has not been damage to dog training as relating to sports.
> 
> I've been training since the 90's.
> 
> ...


That is very interesting.
The 90s were the golden era for dog sports here too, but we never had spectators, more than a few people competing in both obedience and competition or a large proportion of pet owners going on to CD. My impression is that a major reason for the decline in dog sports and conformation in Australia is the increase in two income families and their focus on their children’s activities; only retirees and the young can spare the time for the sport.
I think the biggest risk with trick training from an obedience competition perspective is the concept of offered behaviours. I don’t want my obedience dog “throwing” behaviours at me every time she is uncertain what I want. I’m also glad that the emphasis on clicker-only training seems to have waned. There are actions that are much easier to train with a clicker because of its precision in timing - heeling backwards and forehand turns are examples - but most obedience exercises are best trained without a clicker.
On the whole, I enjoy the greater sophistication and nuance offered by modern dog training methods.


----------

