Oh, I dunno. I prefer my dogs to do what I want because they want to. Not because I am going to eat them if they do not. If the dog knows what you want them to do, understands your command, and the dog wants to please you, because you have made it fun, provided praise and treats, that is not a dictatorship, even if you get excellent results.

If you have to you a harsh, angry tone to ensure that your does exactly what you want them to do when you want them to do it, and they comply because they are fearful of you, which is NOT respect, that is a dictatorship.

So, no, I don't think training should be a dictatorship. I guess I prefer something like expected cooperation.

 

Thats what i took that she was saying from the video-that good training is the dog wanting to do it for you and the dog offers the behaviors

 

If you listen closely, at the end she's saying the puppy doesn't get a treat when she offers a behavior, in this case she sat. The reason she doesn't get a treat is because she wasn't asked to sit. The Amichien Bonding method of training is about teaching a dog that the human is in control, not the dog.

 

Dogs are not people and the more effective trainers clearly understand this. They are not motivated by the same reasoning norms that we process. They are more reliant on drives for basis of behavoir given, than actual reasoning and feelings. That's not to say they don't reason or have feelings,(you always have the person that will take your comment to extremes), but the best results in dog/animal training comes from those that are understanding of primary and secondary motivators and keep the training in the dog's world.

 

I agree not to give a dog a treat for sitting if you did not ask for the sit. If you did that, you are basically training a dog to solicit treats by coming up to you, presenting his body, and assuming the sit position.

 

I agree not to give a dog a treat for sitting if you did not ask for the sit. If you did that, you are basically training a dog to solicit treats by coming up to you, presenting his body, and assuming the sit position.

Exactly! It means the dog is telling you what to do instead of the other way around.

 

I don't know about a dictatorship, but I certainly look at training a bit differently. To me a dog must understand that he must follow my command, there is no other choice for the dog. The dog most certainly can enjoy following my commands and wants to follow the command but a command is just that, a command, not a request. There is simply no other alternative for the dog but to follow it.
Obviously, with a pup of the age in the video it is about teaching not training. However, once a dog reaches an age for training then, to me, there can be no choice except to follow the command.

 

I guess I give my dogs good reason to want to do what I tell them to. Pretty soon treats and praise becomes treats and praise for the best performance or for some performances. And then it is just praise. The dog still wants to do what I tell them to. It is like they are just waiting for me to give them an opportunity. Then its, "Joy, come here." A mad rush to come and sit before me. "Down." And quickly the prone position is acheived. "Find Heel." Sailing into the air and around to my side and looking up for what comes next. "Good girl, let's go get a piece of cheese." And then the mad dash to the fridge.

One does not have to be a dictator to have a well-trained dog.

 

And that begs the question, what if I say, "Joy, come here" and Joy looks at me and does not do what I asked?

The answer is easy, the thermometer would come out and the vet would be called and off we would go because that behavior would be indicative of something bad wrong.

 

I'm in the dictator camp I think. But a fair dictatorship, if that makes sense. (probably doesn't.) I like Zahnburg's post, that sums it up well I think.

Ideally, sure, I want my dog to *want* to do what they're being told, but bottom line is they *must* do what they're told. I'm strongly bonded enough to them that they know I mean what I say, so they don't often "question" it, it is just expected. They might be rewarded, they might not. If they do not do as told, it won't just be ignored. That's the hard part, with dogs AND kids -- it's too easy to give up and let things go, but that's such a recipe for problems. The stuff I just said applies to my older dogs; Bailey is still in the process of learning all of this. I'm tired.

 

I'm in the dictator camp I think. But a fair dictatorship, if that makes sense. (probably doesn't.) I like Zahnburg's post, that sums it up well I think.

Ideally, sure, I want my dog to *want* to do what they're being told, but bottom line is they *must* do what they're told. I'm strongly bonded enough to them that they know I mean what I say, so they don't often "question" it, it is just expected. They might be rewarded, they might not. If they do not do as told, it won't just be ignored. That's the hard part, with dogs AND kids -- it's too easy to give up and let things go, but that's such a recipe for problems.

Agree 100%. Even raising kids is a balancing act of positive and consequences. There are times I need my dog or child to have the fear of consequence but most of the time I want their experience to be positive.

 

I rarely even bring treats to training classes. Puppy classes and maybe the first basic class. Occasionally I will use a treat to train something new. But I use praise pretty liberally.

I think the aversion to "no" is that people tend to say "no" so much to a puppy before they ever take it to classes that "no" is efficiently tuned out to dogs.

Dog training is not rocket science. If you let your dog do something until you jerk it back with a prong collar and growl "NO!" then it will take that to change a behavior. Instead if you say SIT, and the dog does not and you then position the dog into the sit position and say, Good Sit, the dog will get "Oh, yeah Sit, OK." If it sits the next time, and you say "Good boy, good sit." The dog s reinforced.

The idea that one's training techniques are either dictatorship or permissive flighty pooty pupsy insanity is rather absurd.

 

Well I agree with you on what you stated here. I'm working on our pups foundation now and she is not learning no yet. She is just about 13 weeks and is too immature and exiceted to really teach no.
Later she will learn, no don't get on the sofa, no your head does not belong in the trash can, no you can't go outside now and so on. Of course all those will just be no with out the whole phrase. Works with Jack. Hope it works with her. She is not as laid back as he was/is.

 

I don't tend to use the word "no" when I am training puppies, up until the point that they thoroughly understand the command and can execute it reliably. Also we have to keep training in context....some people are talking about dog training that basically takes place in sterile environments and are just basic sit,down stay and heel commands. When you get into advanced training, distractions, competing motivations, and the like, then the treats only and praise only is not enough. Especially when you are training in exercises that have competing motivations. It requires clear communication between handler and dog and clear understanding that lack of execution is not an option.

 

I just realized I almost never use "no." I use "Kopper, get your freaking head out of the garbage," or "Rocky, stop licking the daggum dishes in the dishwasher." They always obey. Maybe they understand my tone of voice?

I also use the ever-popular "Aaaccck!"

I don't use a lot of "dog-ease" with my dogs. I learned a lot from the old man that helped train our cattle dogs. He spoke to his dogs in a soft, conversational tone and used commands like "Lad, come over here and lay down," or "Tip, go round up those Bossies and put them in the pen." You could sit on the porch and say, "Dogs, go move the cows out of the pen now," and they'd jump up and do it. I use formal commands in class and in formal situations, but around the house and in "real life" it's more conversational.

 

Training shouldn't be forceful, it should be something enjoyable, at least when teaching something new to a dog. I'm just an average owner, and I use treats, toys and praise when teaching new stuffs or reinforcing what's taught already; as well as commands for when he wants something (sit/wait before going out and so on). But I'm not fan of always using treats/toys, and I expect my dog to obey whenever I issue a command that he already knows what it means. For that, I'd just try to have his attention by calling his name or using "hey", and then say the command and repeat after a while if he doesn't listen. I won't let him go away with not listening, since it might teach him that it's ok not to listen. If he tries to go away, I'd just hold his collar gently but firmly to restrict him from going away 'till he listens.

 

All I know is my my shelter dog was a grown adult when I adopted him and when hes tired out after a long run he obeys perfectly, but if hes all hyped up he ignores any commands, and Im not sure how to handle it yet.

 

You have 2 choices, witrh any dog at any age, you can be the "Pack Leader" or the "Pack Commander" when the Leader move he/she never looks back because they know the pack is following. The Commander must look back because the pack might be planning a mutiny.

There are very few that understand this, so I thought I'd confuse a few more.

 

Yeah it's a dictatorship once the dog is trained but not in the beginning. If it were me in this video, I would have given the 'sit' cue when that puppy offered the sit (once she was in position) and fed.

With the first sit, the 'trainer' is saying 'sit' as she's luring the puppy into position. Bad timing on her part.