# Training from the start



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Training…specifically

Well, we’ve had many pages of critique on what was basically a hatchet job of de-flaring a retriever. Some were more willing than others to give the benefit of the doubt to whoever coached a weak handler, and an unknown dog. In that tennis match there were lots of opinions about how to go about fairly training for that skill. Suppose we start fresh.

Let’s just begin with a simple diagram or two, and focus on a hypothetical *early transition dog with good basics*. Let’s take this dog – call her “Popsicle” – and teach her…develop her…de-flare her on this type of factor. Choose an obstacle (factor), like these hay bails, or a rock, a log, a bush, or whatever presents an obvious temptation to flare. We can talk distances as we go.

Interested?











Evan


----------



## Jim Scarborough (May 5, 2007)

"Interested?"

I'm all ears. Make that all eyes. Can't wait.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

So, we are doing a "no-no" drill with a dog in transition. Right?


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Yes. I'm all ears.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> So, we are doing a "no-no" drill with a dog in transition. Right?


Not necessarily. The elective use of the "no-no" procedure is part of the discussion. We are to assume in this case that the dog has little or no prior education in deflaring, is in early transition, and whether the trainer opts to handle or employ the "no-no" procedure will at least partly be determined by distances at critical points.










For example, the relative proximity of the line (point of origin), obstacle (factor), and the total distance to the fall, as well as the closeness of the fall and the factor. All of that is at the discretion of the trainer to set up. Also at the trainer's discretion is whether to handle, use "no-no" or a combination.

Set up a course of instruction for "Popsicle" to learn and grow this skill any way you normally might.

On a personal note, I don't subscribe to the idea that there is a "No-no" drill, so much as there are drills designed and configured so that this procedure is a good choice. However, even such a situation that might typically be so constructed may call for an optional approach for a given dog that tends to bug badly when given too much "No-no", or start over work. But let's just start fresh with what's been given, and outline a well reasoned course.

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Start short and build.

What about running it so the obstacle is real close to the starting line (in the diagram...almost running it from top to bottom rather than bottom to top)?

What about putting some chairs or buckets on both sides of the obstacle?


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

I think we should mention that we're using a TT ecollar from 1975 that could start a diesel truck.

/Paul


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> Start short and build.
> 
> What about running it so the obstacle is real close to the starting line (in the diagram...almost running it from top to bottom rather than bottom to top)?
> 
> What about putting some chairs or buckets on both sides of the obstacle?


Anything goes, as long as it's really how you would go about schooling this dog at this skill. Change any of the distances, move up, move back shock, use extra tools or gadgets...it's up to you.

Originally Posted by *Gun_Dog2002*  
_I think we should mention that we're using a TT ecollar from 1975 that could start a diesel truck.

/Paul_
Or you can do it Amish. It's purely personal.

Evan


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Evan said:


> Anything goes, as long as it's really how you would go about schooling this dog at this skill. Change any of the distances, move up, move back shock, use extra tools or gadgets...it's up to you.
> 
> Originally Posted by *Gun_Dog2002*
> _I think we should mention that we're using a TT ecollar from 1975 that could start a diesel truck._
> ...


I think I'd follow the flowchart (from the start) and run this as a "no-no" drill.


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

Chris Atkinson said:


> So, we are doing a "no-no" drill with a dog in transition. Right?


Chris, Evan is describing a drill set, as apposed to where it should fit in a program, am I lost on this? Seems the subject at hand is what it is, not where it is. I'm a newbie and can be off track, just checking.... R/ Byron


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

Oh yea, for all I suggest! HAPPY NEW [email protected]!!!! :>)


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Byron Musick said:


> Chris, Evan is describing a drill set, as apposed to where it should fit in a program, am I lost on this? Seems the subject at hand is what it is, not where it is. I'm a newbie and can be off track, just checking.... R/ Byron


Could be...I was going off the "Anything goes it's up to you."

That's how I'd personally be doing it.

I'll stand down and watch this unfold. Happy New Year to you as well!

Chris


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

For me Evan,
When it is time for this skill to be taught in the natural progression of the dog I am working. I start by sitting on the hay bale. I have actually used hay bales for this exact task because the field I was using was one of those fields horse folk jump over things in.
Anyway, I start sitting my butt on the bales and tossing a bumper to the pile to identify it, dog at front finish. After a couple of reps. I move to the other side of the bales. Sit the dog on the bales, front finish and give a back to the pile. I reach over the bale to receive and if needed coax the dog back onto the bale. Usually it is not an issue as the dog likes to get up on the bale because it is closer to face to face with me.
Next I move the dog to normal heel position and dog and I stand with our legs touching the bale and I again toss a bumper to identify the pile and send as a mark (dogs name) The dog will go over the bale. Again I reach out over bale to encourage the dog coming back over it.
At this point I stray from Evans sketch. I will move the pile out ( it only had 6 bumpers) when I rebird instead of moving my line back. For the first couple days. When the dog is very comfortable going forth and back over bale I start to back up. And move the pile closer to the bale. As distance increases, if the dog goes around I stop, call back to me while I walk up at the same time. Meeting as close to the bale as I feel I need to get, if fail again I move up. Using collar only for sit violations, nothing more. If dog sits and comes back and is sent again it gets no zap.



What do you think Evan? Am I close to how you do it?

.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Just curious, is this an obedience drill?


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

PackLeader said:


> Just curious, is this an obedience drill?



I guess we should clear that up. Evan...is Popsicle "just" a meat dog? 



Ken Bora said:


> WhenAt this point I stray from Evans sketch. I will move the pile out ( it only had 6 bumpers) when I rebird instead of moving my line back.


Might even want to throw some marks instead of using piles. I assume Popsicle could see the pile and would have been forced to a pile, but I find that thrown marks seem to get a dog really fired up.

Heck, you might even want to part the obstacle a bit so it isn't as intimidating


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

You never ran a set up that the judges had a pile of brush or logs or branches ten feet off the running line right on the line to the blind????


PackLeader said:


> Just curious, is this an obedience drill?


they all are obedience drills, in one way or another


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Ken Bora said:


> You never ran a set up that the judges had a pile of brush or logs or branches ten feet off the running line right on the line to the blind????
> ]


Even a novice like me has seen mud puddles used


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

If its any consolation, I am about to post a Youtube video which shows how simple my current training is, and how poorly I do it. I'll also add a video just for fun. I promised, if I can dish it out, I should be able to lay it out!!! What I have to lay out, well maybe the newbies can appreciate!!


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

I would do it similar to Chris, except I would use the collar for what I was teaching at the time, in this case it's over. I would start close and entice him over with a toy while using the button. Now when I back up and the dog tries to go around I can sorta aim him toward the bail using the button.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Huh???? Packleaker, have you ever taught this task or are you just speculating what you might do if you actually did it???
I do not see how shocking the dog until it haphazardly goes in the correct direction is “Teaching” the way I understand the word.

.


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

PackLeader said:


> I would do it similar to Chris, except I would use the collar for what I was teaching at the time, in this case it's over. I would start close and entice him over with a toy while using the button. Now when I back up and the dog tries to go around I can sorta aim him toward the bail using the button.


 

You've got to be a troll.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Goldenboy said:


> You've got to be a troll.[/QUOTE
> 
> Hahaha roflo


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

PackLeader said:


> Hahaha roflo


What is so funny smackleader?
Time to snicker but no time to answer?
Have you taught this task with your boot, scoot, electrocute method?
Bet it builds such a trusting canine companion 

.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

I guess you will have to come see now wont you..


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

I have gas in the truck and the next 5 days off, what bridge you under?

.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

PM me for my cell we can get together and run some drills. You can judge my dogs in person.


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

PackLeader said:


> I would do it similar to Chris, except I would use the collar for what I was teaching at the time, in this case it's over. I would start close and entice him over with a toy while using the button. Now when I back up and the dog tries to go around I can sorta aim him toward the bail using the button.


You mean...nick him when he flares around the obstacle after you have already taught him to go over it? Or do you mean create a hot spot by using the button?

If not, I'm not following you with how you aim a dog with the button.

I'm not trying to be a troll and I'm not trying to trip you up (heaven knows I ain't that smart). I'm just not able to visualize what you're referring to.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Ken Bora said:


> What is so funny smackleader?
> Time to snicker but no time to answer?
> *Have you taught this task* with your boot, scoot, electrocute method?
> Bet it builds such a trusting canine companion
> ...





PackLeader said:


> PM me for my cell we can get together and run some drills. You can judge my dogs in person.


Still waiting I am
Time for the snappy comeback
No time for the answer
I’ll talk ya through it, hit keys Y E S for “yes I have” and keys N O for “no, I have never even seen this before Evan posted his diagram. That is why I had to ask what it was”

.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

TN_LAB said:


> I'm not following you with how you aim a dog with the button......


----------



## afdahl (Jul 5, 2004)

Ken, if NC is on your way to wherever, I'll be more than happy to lend you my camcorder.

Amy Dahl


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Ken Bora said:


>


Huh? Not following the humor.

I know how to burn a dog. I know how to nick a dog. I just never heard the term AIM a DOG.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Guys & gals,

I think we've clearly reached a point at which we need to decide whether to humor someone who is contributing nothing, or continue to focus on training.

It's up to you.

Evan


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Aw gee Evan,
Can’t I keep doing both? So far I am the only one who has outlined how I get over the bales with a dog. And I have really done it.
And I so enjoy the pack smack! And TNLab, I was simply warning you to be on the lookout for the BS what is not to get?

.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Ken, I will pm you a video after..I need to pull it off my minidv first.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

OK...I've stood down long enough and other than Ken's attempt to discuss true training, it appears we're not getting too far.

Evan, I'd like to clear something up.

In this situation, are we stating that we are working to train a dog from the beginning, with "zero holes"? If so, have we completely gotten through the Double T? 

And if the answer is "yes" to the above, are we to assume that this dog has a flaring problem, which we are looking to cure using the schematic shown?

Let's start there.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Hi Chris,
In my flow, this is after the dog is running simple cold blinds. I will then do this drill because the game I play the mostest is the NAHRA Field Test and as you know, even in intermediate the judges will run blinds over brush or into bushes or over logs. So after simple cold blinds are well under way I introduce this factor as a drill like I typed above. Then do almost the same thing with brush and then a big log. Then start adding these now taught factors to the simple cold blinds they are already running. The dog probably has not flared anything before because it has run nothing to cause it to flair. That is where I fit this in.

.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> OK...I've stood down long enough and other than Ken's attempt to discuss true training, it appears we're not getting too far.
> 
> Evan, I'd like to clear something up.
> 
> ...


Yes, Chris. Through TT, and Swim-by...through Basics and starting Transition. All dogs have flaring problem until they're trained not to flare, and then maintained. This is just the 'train them not to' part.

The diagram just shows the straight route with a simple straight forward factor to deflare on.

Evan


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

First of all, my dogs are born to flare.  It's not their fault, it just make sense to go around things that seem to be "in the way". And then again they will be pulled toward things that seem attractive. So if this causes issues with what we want them to do, they need to learn how to deal with it. 



> Set up a course of instruction for "Popsicle" to learn and grow this skill any way you normally might.


I’ve done the same routine for my last four pups. With photos it is fairly easy to explain. I do not work on this skill until a pup is through T work. However, the basics of it could be completed sooner. I just feel it becomes a fun “change of pace” for a dog that is further along in transition. It is easier to finesse a pup through it when you can mix in no-no modes and handling at the same time...depending on the pup's skill levels and attitude. You're more flexible in the moment that way. 

I should mention for the record we seem to do just fine without favorite toys, buttons and/or “aiming”. 

The photos provide a fairly obvious progression of teaching……going over both ways, identifying a target, handling with sit, here, over and back commands, corrections and praise timed to remind and/or reward. It is a team “thing” and we work together. Of course the teamwork respect for the process is established way before things get very complicated. So the pup goes into this with a positive, "what’s next" attitude. They really want to "get it".

The expectation of this first drill (which usually progresses to a pile farther away from the jump on the first day) is to eventually extend the concept to real logs in complex designs. "Going straight' has to be taught in several different situations with many factors before a dog will ”see the line”......and distance is a huge factor. Work close and teach. Move out and continue to teach. 

The first five photos show Daisy reviewing her skills (so I could get the photos). 

The next six photos are in the next post. They show Gunny working through the drill in one day. 

The last photo is an extension of the drill (done at anther time). The pile is much farther away. There is an angle exit off the gravel road, a line by the end of one log (this is the most difficult part of the drill), a jump over the next long and pass through a slot of two stickmen. To repeat "Work close and teach. Move out and continue to teach." 


The next phase is to run up the front side and down the back side of mounds. 

*”equipment – camo’d jump”*









*”here across”*









*”here the other way”* 









*”identify”*









*”very close return (see farther pile in the background)”*


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

*”teaching – using sit, here, over & back”* 









*”taught”*









*”diggin’ the pile’*









*”first day”*









*”Gunny’s liking this”* 









*”extending concepts”*


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

KwickLabs said:


> *”here across”*


I like the idea of calling the dog "here" to cross the obstacle.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Evan,

The dog doesn't want to go over the object at all, or just not from a distance? I was talking about getting the dog over the bail on a leash with a collar that doesn't want to go over.

I was thinking about making the dog go over an object like a chair from a distance. After seeing the photos I think I'm thinking of a more technical drill.


You would have to make the width of the jump much more narrow for the drill I was thinking of.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Evan,
> 
> The dog doesn't want to go over the object at all, or just not from a distance? I was talking about getting the dog over the bail on a leash with a collar that doesn't want to go over.
> 
> ...


Jamie,

I hoped to make it clear that the original diagram, as is, only represents a concept. The trainer is at liberty to alter the presentation in any way to teach and develop that concept.

To answer your question about the dog not wanting to cross the obstacle, any dog with a working brain cell would prefer to run around such an object by nature because it's faster and easier than negotiating it. Flaring is among the commonest causes of route deviation; suction and drift being the other two. We're just deflaring here.

So far, I like the way Ken gets it going, but with a twist. That twist is Jim's use of the command "Here"; calling the dog to you across the obstacle, which is what I commonly do. The late Rex Carr pointed out that "Here" is the most enforceable command. It's also the simplest. It's easy to entice a dog across something (log, hay bail, homemade barrier board, etc.), and praise him for compliance. Doing that before retrieving is involved also keeps any failure and/or correction uninvolved with retrieving. I also like the fact that Kwick got it going with a wider obstacle to simplify the task for a dog that is new to deflaring work.

But we're just starting. Kwick clearly has a vision of sequential training, and shows that in his photos. That is the mechanism I would use to grow the skill into a practical form. Like many of you, I would start out with the obstacle up close for a session or two.










Universally, distance erodes control. It's completely natural for a dog to want to flare such an object, even at this distance. A dog that would naturally want to run out and cross it at 70-80 yards without substantial training is dumb as a stump! It's so much more logical to flare it. That's why it takes training to deflare.

It's also easy to be myopic about what you see in such training. But it builds less distractible dogs - dogs that aren't constantly seeking the path of least resistance, and thereby requiring much more handling to successfully negotiate a difficult route. In any type of judged event this sort of testing reveals a dog's trainability and willingness to work with a handler.

But, back to training. How about extending this principle? How would you continue to develop and advance it?

Evan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Just so we are all on the same page as far as how I apply the e-collar to directional work. This is basically how I do directional work with the e-collar. 

I use the same concept shown here but replace the boards with a birds..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESo_9NteESA


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Evan said:


> Jamie,
> 
> I hoped to make it clear that the original diagram, as is, only represents a concept. The trainer is at liberty to alter the presentation in any way to teach and develop that concept.
> 
> ...


I would first use two or more bails in a row, using more obstacles keeps them in a straighter line over a long distance??


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> I would *first* use two or more bails in a row, using more obstacles keeps them in a straighter line over a long distance??


You would _start_ by doing that? Why not start with the concept in its simplest form?

Evan


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

We do it just as Quick does with hunting and trial dogs,and it works fine resulting in a happy confident dog.Gradually holding more accountable,we go people sitting in chairs and such.In the spillway we frequently have the obstacle up front for the trial dogs,as thats what they are going to get most of the time.You really have something if your dog will recognize a keyhole at a distance,and willingly take it.
This is what I call Retriever Training. Net I dont care how long someone has been training.....they can pick up tidbits from these type of threads.....Thanks !

OH.Unless they know it all !!!


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

If I can stand 6 feet from the bail and tell the dog back and he jumps over then I would start with that. If he refuses to go over from a close distance even for a toy I would teach him over using a leash and collar.

Once the dog will go over from six feet, I would place another bail ten feet past that one, if the dog bugs on the second bail bring it closer. If he still doesn't go over the second one then I would try sit in between the bails.. I would keep it short until the bugging is gone.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Just so we are all on the same page as far as how I apply the e-collar to directional work. This is basically how I do directional work with the e-collar.
> 
> I use the same concept shown here but replace the boards with a birds..
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESo_9NteESA


 I'm puzzled about how this fits into our conversation? I'm also puzzled about an e-collar connection? Did you see one used in that clip?

Evan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Evan said:


> I'm puzzled about how this fits into our conversation? I'm also puzzled about an e-collar connection? Did you see one used in that clip?
> 
> Evan


You never seen an e-collar used in this situation to push or pull a dog back to a board?


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

You can tell better from this video when he is using the collar to push the dog back to the board..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyrRO0a7MeM


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

I think there are many ways to go about teaching these things to dogs and Packleaders way is just as viable,,,,but when you condition a dog a certain way using a certain tool then you have to be prepared to correct or enforce a certain way down the road as not to confuse the dog.

An example of this may be using a stick to drive a dog back and then using a stick for sit,,,,,,, sometimes you would wack and say sit and the dog would go foward because it was conditioned that way,,,, or if he didnt lurch foward his countanance showed conflict and or confusion

So there can be an elelement of confusion for the dog,,

Thats why there are step by step programs,,, what would work for packleader may not work for a newer person mixing methods,,, 

The dog jumping the chair is a good example,,,probably taught similar to what Packleaders saying ,,the dog had a great attitude and was incredably attentive,

How these techniques work at 200 yards in the field when a dog refuses something and is commanded to do something is where the rubber meets the road,,,

Now will the method at 20 yards produce the same result at 200 and if it doesnt what is your next method for compliance,,,and will it cause conflict or confusion or enhance learning

Those are a couple of things I would think about when doing something new.
How does the pressure related yard work transfer in the field,,,where patterns no longer exist and things are not black and white

Pete


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

No, I really didn't hear Pat say he was using the e-collar at all. I also didn't see any call for it. Why would he have used an e-collar at any point in what looked more like a game?

And what relationship does it have to our subject of deflaring?

Evan


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Maybe it's my eyes but...I don't see a collar being used in the last referenced video.

john


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Yeah that big old dogtra box is hard to see on the dogs collar..Look in his right hand you can see the transmitter..


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I don't see any nicking. Holding a transmitter does not=using it.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Yeah that big old dogtra box is hard to see on the dogs collar..Look in his right hand you can see the transmitter..


And so you believe because an e-collar is present that it's being used? When? For what?

You chose a good trainer to show. I think if Pat were using the collar he would have mentioned it to the group, and explained how and why.

Evan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

ErinsEdge said:


> I don't see any nicking. Holding a transmitter does not=using it.


I have trained enough dogs with e-collar to tell when he is using it.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Yeah that big old dogtra box is hard to see on the dogs collar..Look in his right hand you can see the transmitter..


Of course the dog has a collar on and the trainer has a transmitter, but...... 

Are you suggesting that Pat is correcting with a "cold" collar correction ? For some reason I don't think so. Remember now, Pat uses a Carr based system.

Tweet nick tweet regards
john


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Yeah that big old dogtra box is hard to see on the dogs collar..Look in his right hand you can see the transmitter..


Sure the dog is wearing an ecollar, but he is only using the collar for failure to sit, failure to stay, failure to come. Not for teaching the casting!!! ;-)

He isn't using the ecollar to "push" or "pull" the dog to the board as you suggest.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Using Indirect Pressure in Casting Drills
Until now we have used the e-collar to apply “direct” pressure: a whistle sit and nick for failure to sit, and here-nick-here for failure to come when called. We can also use the e-collar to apply “indirect” pressure by correcting or forcing on one command to improve performance on another. 

To correct for cast refusal using indirect pressure, whistle sit your dog. If needed, call in to reposition, whistle sit, tap, tap, tap, tap, on sit, and whistle sit again. Then recast. 

This works on three levels to improve casting response. First, the dog is unsuccessful in his choice of response. Dogs will eventually eliminate behavior that does not bring reward. Second, the e-collar tap on sit is an unpleasant result of the inappropriate response. Dogs will eventually eliminate behavior that results in discomfort. Finally, dogs generalize information; improvement in the dog’s performance on the sit command carries over to other commands. 

This indirect pressure on whistle sit along with force on the command for proper response will be the two main methods we will use to correct for cast refusals throughout the dog’s training in the field. The requirement that your dog sit on the nick is not new and should pose no problems for him. But, be diligent here. Some dogs will try to jump to retrieve in response to the nick or run in on the nick. For you to correct with the e-collar now and later in the field, your dog must sit on the nick. For any inappropriate response, step in and use the line to guide the proper response, ending the tap, tap, tap when your dog obeys the sit whistle. 

by Pat Nolan


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

And _that's_ what you believe you saw in those clips?

Evan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Left and Right Over Casts
Work on each cast individually. Start by casting to a visible, thrown bumper. 

Place your dog on a sit-stay. He should be wearing his e-collar and a choke chain with a 15-foot line attached to the live ring of the choke chain. Step off about six feet in front and turn to face him. With your right hand, toss one bumper to land 10 feet off your dog’s left shoulder. 

Blow the sit whistle and when he is looking at you, cast with your right hand, command “fetch/over” and begin tapping. Your dog’s movement to retrieve should stop the taping. When you are convinced he understands the cast intermittently force in route on “fetch” tap “fetch.” Praise for a good retrieve; repeat your command and tap until he picks up the bumper if your dog should deviate or quit on the way to the bumper.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Using Indirect Pressure in Casting Drills
> Until now we have used the e-collar to apply “direct” pressure: a whistle sit and nick for failure to sit, and here-nick-here for failure to come when called. We can also use the e-collar to apply “indirect” pressure by correcting or forcing on one command to improve performance on another.
> 
> To correct for cast refusal using indirect pressure, whistle sit your dog. If needed, call in to reposition, whistle sit, tap, tap, tap, tap, on sit, and whistle sit again. Then recast.
> ...


That is what I just said

john


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Left and Right Over Casts
> Work on each cast individually. Start by casting to a visible, thrown bumper.
> 
> Place your dog on a sit-stay. He should be wearing his e-collar and a choke chain with a 15-foot line attached to the live ring of the choke chain. Step off about six feet in front and turn to face him. With your right hand, toss one bumper to land 10 feet off your dog’s left shoulder.
> ...


An extention of that is *not* what is happening in the video

john


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Left and Right Over Casts
> Work on each cast individually. Start by casting to a visible, thrown bumper.
> 
> Place your dog on a sit-stay. He should be wearing his e-collar and a choke chain with a 15-foot line attached to the live ring of the choke chain. Step off about six feet in front and turn to face him. With your right hand, toss one bumper to land 10 feet off your dog’s left shoulder.
> ...


Is this your formula, or are you just cutting and pasting from someone else's writing. And what on _earth_ does this have to do with deflaring???

Evan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Didn't you just ask me when he is using the collar in the video? Yes that is Pat's instructions.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

"When you are convinced he understands the cast intermittently force in route on “fetch” tap “fetch.” Praise for a good retrieve;"

That has everything to do with straight lines I think...


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> "When you are convinced he understands the cast intermittently force in route on “fetch” tap “fetch.” Praise for a good retrieve;"
> 
> That has everything to do with straight lines I think...


:lol: :lol:

Evan

I blame you for this!!! You titled this thread, "Training from the start". :lol:


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

Pat mentioned in the video that the puppy was 7 months old and had a couple weeks training. I 'm sure Pat has a ton of stuff to do in a day and cant spend all day with one dog

So does a dog get that far usually with 2 weeks of conventional training?

Or has he changed things up to excellerate learning in young dogs

Can there be new ways to enhance and excellerate training that maybe some people are not ready to accept,,,because they go against conventional methods and wisdom.?
I say no doubt,,,hell yes

I cant tell whats happenening in the video,,,looks like a happy ,,well on his way to being trained puppy doing things many dogs with just 2 weeks of training dont do.

Evan 
I can see how this can be a way to approach flaring 

but I know this wasnt the jist of your original post,,like everything else around here it gets side tract and ends up eventually driving off a cliff

discussing new idea's here has always been at best painful

Looks like you going to have to start a new training thread:razz::razz:

Pete


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

On forcing to the pile jamie-not sending the dog over or through obstacles. 

I would like to see you train by only teaching with the collar(which from your posts is your main teaching tool) a field competitor. You take that collar off and fido is 150 yrds away from you- your naaaaaging collar relationship will earn you the collective doggie finger. Or you will have a dog so terrified walking to the line...-well how fun is that for you, the judges and the dog? 

Just my humble opinion.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Pals said:


> On forcing to the pile jamie-not sending the dog over or through obstacles.
> 
> I would like to see you train by only teaching with the collar(which from your posts is your main teaching tool) a field competitor. You take that collar off and fido is 150 yrds away from you- your naaaaaging collar relationship will earn you the collective doggie finger. Or you will have a dog so terrified walking to the line...-well how fun is that for you, the judges and the dog?
> 
> Just my humble opinion.


My dog never has to wear a collar anymore. He can be at the dog park 100 yards away trying to rip the toy out of another dogs mouth. I tell him sit and he will sit faster than you can say wow..If you ever seen my dogs you would know they are more than happy and confident. So I would have to disagree..


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> I have trained enough dogs with e-collar to tell when he is using it.


You don't seem to understand what a "cold "collar correction is.

There are some retriever trainers that effectively use them as an intrigal part of their system, Jim Dobbs is the most notable among them. Pat for the most part does not .

john


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Evan said:


> Yes, Chris. Through TT, and Swim-by...through Basics and starting Transition. All dogs have flaring problem until they're trained not to flare, and then maintained. This is just the 'train them not to' part.
> 
> The diagram just shows the straight route with a simple straight forward factor to deflare on.
> 
> Evan


Thanks Evan,

Maybe we should first define "flaring". Is "flaring" the notion that the dog will naturally avoid the hay bale without traning to do so, or is "flaring" the idea of the dog avoiding the direct line due to forcing in pile work (which was done primarily to help create a compulsion to go)?

Evan, did we work during the pilework to fix a flaring problem when/if it came up for popsicle?

Are we to assume on Double T that before advancing to swimby, the dog still had a "flaring problem"? Or are we to assume the dog was doing the drill reliably and showed no signs of "flaring" as a result of the forcing on back during the basics program?

Your quote from above paraphrased as "all dogs have a flaring problem until trained not to"... makes me wonder what you mean by a flare, and whether or not we fixed a flaring problem in the basics program.

Thanks for clarifying. I think THIS is the sort of stuff that can really help folks understand some of the challenges that can come up during a modern program, and why it is not a formula, but rather an art to progress a dog through these steps.

Chris


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Oh man my resolution is about to go out the window.....

Train a field competitor with your collar teaching methods-I'm talking MH, HRCH, QAA and above-not playing in a dog park. Better yet just try "your" nagging collar training with.a field golden or a chessie.  

Seriously-good luck to you-field work is challenging and requires lots of tools in the toolbox. 

tap dancing regards!!


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

john fallon said:


> You don't seem to understand what a "cold "collar correction is.
> 
> There are some retriever trainers that effectively use them as an intrigal part of their system, Jim Dobbs is the most notable among them. Pat for the most part does not .
> 
> john


Pat does not use them or Pat does not use them effectively?


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Thanks Evan,
> 
> Maybe we should first define "flaring". Is "flaring" the notion that the dog will naturally avoid the hay bale without traning to do so, or is "flaring" the idea of the dog avoiding the direct line due to forcing in pile work (which was done primarily to help create a compulsion to go)?
> 
> ...


I was confused too. I think of "flaring" as a pressure induced deviation that is learned, as in flaring a hot spot, flaring a gunner, or flaring an old fall. However, I think the "flaring" that Evan is talking about is more what I call a "cheat" as in, cheat the water, cheat a piece of cover, etc.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> You don't seem to understand what a "cold "collar correction is


John 
There are ways to use the e-collar which the dogs do not interpret a correction .
You can actually get the level very low and continuous and teach dogs to go to or from an area with out much help,,,they learn by an interaction with an unknown or almost unreconizable low level stimulous which causes little or no confict between dog and handler ,,,but the dog senses it and acts accordingly. with proper timing and movement all kinds of things can be taught with electric without the dog thinking its just been zapped.

There is people doing all kinds of stuff out there that retriever people never heard of. ,,,but that should be its own thread,,,we are messing up Evan's flairing drill thread

sorry Evan wont happen again
back to your scheduled programming

Pete


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Pete said:


> John
> There are ways to use the e-collar which the dogs do not interpret a correction .
> You can actually get the level very low and continuous and teach dogs to go to or from an area with out much help,,,they learn by an interaction with an unknown or almost unreconizable low level stimulous which causes little or no confict between dog and handler ,,,but the dog senses it and acts accordingly. with proper timing and movement all kinds of things can be taught with electric without the dog thinking its just been zapped.
> 
> ...


You know exactly what you are looking at.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Pat does not use them or Pat does not use them effectively?


He does not normally use them as part of his training regimen

A)Pat uses what is called by "Retriever trainers" a Carr based program/System.
+
B)"Cold" collar corrections are not normally a part of a Carr based collar program/system.
=
C)We can be fairly certain that contrary to your assertion to the contrary, Pat is not using then in the referenced video clip

john


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Pete said:


> John
> There are ways to use the e-collar which the dogs do not interpret a correction .
> You can actually get the level very low and continuous and teach dogs to go to or from an area with out much help,,,they learn by an interaction with an unknown or almost unreconizable low level stimulous which causes little or no confict between dog and handler ,,,but the dog senses it and acts accordingly. with proper timing and movement all kinds of things can be taught with electric without the dog thinking its just been zapped.
> 
> ...


The question here is not that it doesn't work in the venue they are using it, but how well does it work applied to advanced retriever work. Direct pressure, particularly direct pressure used to teach, was done by those that took the collar out of the box and just started to zap. Direct pressure was either not a successful method in advanced competition, or it produced piggy dogs especially on blinds. Even Dobbs modified his original nagging method for the field. Maybe the proponents of putting the collar on when they are 7 weeks old and nicking to teach should come back when they are successful with titles to prove their success like the Carr based methods.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Pete said:


> John
> There are ways to use the e-collar which the dogs do not interpret a correction .
> You can actually get the level very low and continuous and teach dogs to go to or from an area with out much help,,,they learn by an interaction with an unknown or almost unreconizable low level stimulous which causes little or no confict between dog and handler ,,,but the dog senses it and acts accordingly. with proper timing and movement all kinds of things can be taught with electric without the dog thinking its just been zapped.
> 
> ...


In the video in question?.... Without comment ? Somehow I doubt that.

john


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

take those bails, spread then out in a single line and make the obstacle larger, but easier to corss, put a blind pole on either side to create clarity, start with the dog 2 feet from the obstacle working on recall first...

NO PRESSURE TEACH TEACH TEACH


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

john fallon said:


> He does not normally use them as part of his training regimen
> 
> A)Pat uses what is called by "Retriever trainers" a Carr based program/System.
> +
> ...


The name of the video is REMOTE DIRECTIONAL WORK. Remote meaning REMOTE COLLAR. I have no delusions about what I see taking place in the videos.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> The name of the video is REMOTE DIRECTIONAL WORK. Remote meaning REMOTE COLLAR. I have no delusions about what I see taking place in the videos.


*WRONG!!!!*

Remote meaning the dog is not at your side!!!!!

Thanks for playing. Try again!!!


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

What does he have in his left hand?


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Cmon man you people love to argue..Read the entire description.

This clip shows left and right over left and right back off leash with a six month old puppy *working on e-collar.*


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

john fallon said:


> You don't seem to understand what a "cold "collar correction is.
> 
> There are some retriever trainers that effectively use them as an intrigal part of their system, Jim Dobbs is the most notable among them. Pat for the most part does not .
> 
> john


Jim has evolved and change his methods over the years as well. I think you would find he doesn't cold burn as much as he used to.

/Paul


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

PackLeader said:


> What does he have in his left hand?


 
Treats! I think they are treats!


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

gdluck said:


> Treats! I think they are treats!


No I am sure its a clicker


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Cmon man *you people love to argue*..Read the entire description.
> 
> This clip shows left and right over left and right back off leash with a six month old puppy *working on e-collar.*


Only when someone is "pissing on my boot" and telling me that it's rain.;-)

john


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Is there a give this guy a set of waders icon?


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

See over in the right hand corner>Click on "More Info"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESo_9NteESA

"Labrador Puppy working in drive training on Remote Directional signals. Maryland Retreiver Trainer Pat Nolan working with a Max. This clip shows left and right over left and right back off leash with a six month old puppy working on e-collar."


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> _Thanks Evan,_





Chris Atkinson said:


> _Maybe we should first define "flaring". Is "flaring" the notion that the dog will naturally avoid the hay bale without training to do so, or is "flaring" the idea of the dog avoiding the direct line due to forcing in pile work (which was done primarily to help create a compulsion to go)?_


Thanks for asking, Chris. Your questions are kind of a breath of fresh air, since they actually relate to our subject!

As I often speak about the subject of cheating as simply being diverted routes, I believe there are three broad headings, under which are the three main influences that cause dogs to divert:

Flare
Suction
Drift
There are more factors than one that can cause any of those things to occur. That brings me to an answer to your very important question; what is flaring?

Flare: (as pertains to retriever fieldwork) I define flare as avoidance of a specific spot, area, or obstacle. Clearly, that can happen for more reasons than one. In this case we’re anticipating the expectable outcome of a dog avoiding a prominent object in his path.


Chris Atkinson said:


> _Evan, did we work during the pile work to fix a flaring problem when/if it came up for Popsicle?_


I do very little during the force to pile process relating to de-flaring. In the type of flaring that occurs during pile work the dog is avoiding the area of stimulus when en route forcing occurred. Unless it’s profound, I usually don’t do much about it until I’m in T work. I believe the parameters there make it easier for the dog to understand the concept of that simple route a bit better than when it’s just a way to get from point “A” to point “B”.


Chris Atkinson said:


> _Are we to assume on Double T that before advancing to swim by, the dog still had a "flaring problem"? Or are we to assume the dog was doing the drill reliably and showed no signs of "flaring" as a result of the forcing on back during the basics program?_


I tend to operate on the presumption that all dogs have an inborn flaring problem, inasmuch as true routes, especially in the presence of factors like this, are not natural to dogs. If they have any intelligence and/or intuition (as I believe they nearly all have) they flare (or avoid) structure that appears easier to run around. So we school them.


Chris Atkinson said:


> _Your quote from above paraphrased as "all dogs have a flaring problem until trained not to"... makes me wonder what you mean by a flare, and whether or not we fixed a flaring problem in the basics program._


Other than cooling off the usual hot spots that come up during Basics, very little de-flaring is done then. That is particularly true of flaring obstacles like this. Am I making myself clear about the difference?


Chris Atkinson said:


> _Thanks for clarifying. I think THIS is the sort of stuff that can really help folks understand some of the challenges that can come up during a modern program, and why it is not a formula, but rather an art to progress a dog through these steps._


I sure hope so. I think you have to love the good natured semantics of some of our members, no matter what the subject matter may be. But I also appreciate the real contributions they make, and how willingly they share their ideas. I love a good training discussion!

Thanks,
Evan


----------



## Matthew Hambright (Dec 6, 2009)

Remote was used in the description because the dog wasnt at his side in my opinion, not because it was fixing to be a BBQ! I dont think he used the e collar in the video in my opinion. And again IS there really that many people out there that use a E collar to "TEACH"?

Packleader, are you close to Kansas?


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Well, you guys motivated me to head to the field this morning and give some of this a try.

Local field has some low spot mud puddles (ankle deep).

Sat the dog right at puddle's edge
I walked straight through the puddle and called the dog. "Good girl"
Repeat from other side...ran back through the puddle.
Repeat from 10 feet
Re-repeat (each time I'm walking back and forth through the puddle)

I then sit the dog 10 feet from puddle, but I walk about 50 feet on the other side of the puddle. Call the dog. "Good girl"

Gradually build so that my dog is running from 50 feet...through the puddle to my side about 50+ feet on the other side (100 feet total).

I then start tossing the bumper and sending the dog from my side (start short and gradually build up to 50+ feet). Dog starts to break down on the return by "skating" around the edge of the puddle on the return...so I shorten up, use body English, a bucket, and I move laterally while giving the HERE command all in an attempt to influence her to return through the puddle.

Finally, we start working on a pile that requires the dog to run through the puddle (starting short and building) "Good girl"

Repeat to the pile

Also note: I gave her a verbal "good girl" as she was returning through the middle of the puddle and placed a bucket at the side of the puddle to block her.

In all, I was quite please with her (our) progress.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Hambone84 said:


> I don't think he used the e collar in the video in my opinion.


That's what separates the pros from the Joes.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> Well, you guys motivated me to head to the field this morning and give some of this a try.
> 
> Local field has some low spot mud puddles (ankle deep).
> 
> ...


So, you can honestly say "I went training today". Nice work!

Evan


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> That's what separates the pros from the Joes.


Are you saying a pro is presumptuous? I know Pat. I imagine a number of people know and respect him. If he had used that e-collar he would have said so, and explained how and why. 

As John has so rightly stated before, Pat Nolan is not the "cold burn" type. He's too good a trainer for that sort of thing. 

I still wonder how you think this relates to de-flaring?

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> So, you can honestly say "I went training today". Nice work!
> 
> Evan


Yes.
My dog and I would be a bit depressed if I had a day off from work and didn't do some training. I used to feel the same way about exercise, but I've since found ways to get over that problem


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Ken Bora said:


> For me Evan,
> When it is time for this skill to be taught in the natural progression of the dog I am working. I start by sitting on the hay bale. I have actually used hay bales for this exact task because the field I was using was one of those fields horse folk jump over things in.
> Anyway, I start sitting my butt on the bales and tossing a bumper to the pile to identify it, dog at front finish. After a couple of reps. I move to the other side of the bales. Sit the dog on the bales, front finish and give a back to the pile. I reach over the bale to receive and if needed coax the dog back onto the bale. Usually it is not an issue as the dog likes to get up on the bale because it is closer to face to face with me.
> Next I move the dog to normal heel position and dog and I stand with our legs touching the bale and I again toss a bumper to identify the pile and send as a mark (dogs name) The dog will go over the bale. Again I reach out over bale to encourage the dog coming back over it.
> At this point I stray from Evans sketch. I will move the pile out ( it only had 6 bumpers) when I rebird instead of moving my line back. For the first couple days. When the dog is very comfortable going forth and back over bale I start to back up. And move the pile closer to the bale. As distance increases, if the dog goes around I stop, call back to me while I walk up at the same time. Meeting as close to the bale as I feel I need to get, if fail again I move up. Using collar only for sit violations, nothing more. If dog sits and comes back and is sent again it gets no zap.


I like your method. Something fun to do now when we can't do much.


----------



## Clayton Evans (Jun 26, 2008)

Is this forum not called Retriever Training Forum? Anytime someone asks a simple question people have to ruin the topic by their bickering and snide remarks. If we can't agree with what a poster has to say just ignore his response and he/she will just go away. This has got so blatant lately it is getting to the point of being ridiculous. 
Even, thanks for starting this discussion and sorry for those posters that don't seem to understand what flaring is all about.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Evan said:


> Are you saying a pro is presumptuous? I know Pat. I imagine a number of people know and respect him. If he had used that e-collar he would have said so, and explained how and why.
> 
> As John has so rightly stated before, Pat Nolan is not the "cold burn" type. He's too good a trainer for that sort of thing.
> 
> I still wonder how you think this relates to de-flaring?Evan


I'm saying if he cant tell he is using the collar then he must be doing something right! I can read a dog and know what I'm looking at.

He put e-collar directional work in the description and he is holding a remote...

Again, don't want to argue...email Pat and ask him..


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> I'm saying if he cant tell he is using the collar then he must be doing something right! I can read a dog and know what I'm looking at.
> 
> He put e-collar directional work in the description and he is holding a remote...
> 
> Again, don't want to argue...email Pat and ask him..


Again you appear to have it wrong.
He put the word remote(read distant: located far away spatially) in the description and appears* to you *to have a transmitter in his hand.

john


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> I'm saying if he cant tell he is using the collar then he must be doing something right! I can read a dog and know what I'm looking at.
> 
> He put e-collar directional work in the description and he is holding a remote...
> 
> Again, don't want to argue...email Pat and ask him..


Who brought Pat's videos into this discussion?

Pat, to my mind, is a complete uninvolved non-participant in this discussion. I personally don't think Pat should be receiving emails from forum users to settle disputes from an internet discussion forum that in the end, will not change anyone's mind, or improve anyone's training.

How about let's try to stay positive and be dog trainers instead of playground combatants for the top of the jungle gym.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

john fallon said:


> Again you appear to have it wrong.
> He put the word remote(read distant: located far away spatially) in the description and appears* to you *to have a transmitter in his hand.
> 
> john


No he put puppy "*working on e-collar*" now why would he put "working on e-collar" and have a transmitter in his hand if he wasn't using one!

And how is enforcing a know command considered a "cold burn?"


----------



## Matt McKenzie (Oct 9, 2004)

I hope that one day I'm as good a dog trainer as Pack Leader thinks he is! I just hope that I won't make the mistake of thinking I know more than everybody else and make a fool out of myself by making ridiculously ignorant posts on the internet.

As far as deflaring over obstacles goes, I use a method that is very similar to both Ken's and Jim's. I use both marks and piles, I start with a recall at short distances, go to sends at very short distances, make adjustments based on the individual dog and almost never use collar corrections until we have done lots of drills over various obstacles at significant distances. Even then, I'll more than likely use attrition unless I'm convinced that the dog is being willfully disobedient, which I find happens very rarely. I'll eventually use logs, brush piles, natural cover changes, mud puddles, etc. I do this roughly during the same timeframe I do cheating singles on water.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> No he put puppy "*working on e-collar*" now why would he put "working on e-collar" and have a transmitter in his hand if he wasn't using one!
> 
> And how is enforcing a know command considered a "cold burn?"


Puppy working on an e-collar ????????

I'm not discussing anything but but the first video that you posted as an example and that was not its title.

A *cold *correction has nothing to do with enforcing or not, rather the *how* and* when *of it.

john


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Yes in the first video I posted. See the picture of the bark barrel next to Pat Nolans name?

Right under his name click on "more info" It will give you the "entire video descrition." Feel free to cut and paste what is says..


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

However this meaningless tennis match turns out, there is still not even an attempt to relate it to the topic of flaring or de-flaring. So, I plan to move on in the discussion.

If no one has other questions about the type of flaring under discussion, let's move on toward advancing Popsicle's skill level. One idea was mentioned earlier; that of placing multiple obstacles on line to the fall. But it was suggeted that the trainer might start out that way. I believe in starting simple and sequentially advancing the difficulty of a challenge.

We've gotten a fair concensus of how to start, I hope. A sort of combination of Ken & Kwick's ideas together seem very logical and fair.










_"HERE!"_​ 
But let's consider using the following diagram in more than one way.










Let's say for now that we've begun this training with an overall distance from the line to the fall at around 100 yards. Further, let's say we understand enough about dogs to have started with a single obstacle placed at perhaps 10-15 feet, and gotten it going well using the approach above. Now we'll look at raising the standard.

Rather than throwing multiple obstacles out there, let's look at this diagram as a suggested progression in distance; one obstacle being placed a bit further out on a progressive presentation. Our fall area might be a now-identified pile, so the spot of the fall doesn't become an extra issue.

Look at the diagram as a suggeted distance progression, starting at 20 yards. This would be based on our having advanced to that point, and that we have been getting Popsicle across it reliably with little or no handling now. Without using this suggestion as a set formula, the diagram would simply indicate that, on succeeding sessions, moving the obstacle further out - perhaps 10-20 yards at a time.

Once more for clarity; only one obstacle, moved out from session to session as we read the dog is ready for it. How are we doing so far?

Evan


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

If I could only think of something to add, stinks being a newbie! But, collar pressure should be taught in such as way the dog understands how to turn it off, correct? I would love to understand "Cold" correction as it applies to e-collar's or anything else.. Healing Stick, etc.... Sounds alot like FF training??


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Byron Musick said:


> If I could only think of something to add, stinks being a newbie! But, collar pressure should be taught in such as way the dog understands how to turn it off, correct? I would love to understand "Cold" correction as it applies to e-collar's or anything else.. Healing Stick, etc.... Sounds alot like FF training??


Byron,

I hope you'll never have reason to fear asking questions here. That's how any of us learn - that and trial & error. I've been blessed to learn from excellent dog people. I've also learned from terrible ones. Each taught me that asking questions was a good practice!

You are correct regarding the core principles of e-collar conditioning. It's just another aspect of pressure conditioning. We set up fair and obvious exercises that allow our dogs to understand what is expected because the command and functions we use were taught previously. As we apply pressure in conjunction with a known command, we demonstrate to the dog that complying with the command turns off that pressure. That, in my opinion, is how a fair and competent trainer does business.

"Cold burns" are stimulus that arrives without information, without prior warning, and without being tied to a known command. If the dog is in the wrong place, or is doing a wrong thing (each purely in the eye of the 'trainer'), the dog just gets burned or nicked. The hope is that he won't go there again, or do that again. Frankly, I think that is among the weakest of training practices. 

Have I helped?

Evan


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyrRO0a7MeM

This is the video in question I need no further reference information to know what is going on here. 

'Till now I have given you the benefit of the doubt. but at this point I must join the consensus.

john


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

No that is not the first video I posted this is..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESo_9NteESA

Read the description.


Subscribe 
Unsubscribe PatNolan
December 16, 2007

(more info) 
(less info) Want to Subscribe?
Sign In or Sign Up now! 
http://ponderosakennels.com... Labrador Puppy working in drive training on Remote Directional signals. Maryland Retreiver Trainer Pat Nolan working with a Max. This clip shows left and right over l... 
http://ponderosakennels.com/blog Labrador Puppy working in drive training on Remote Directional signals. Maryland Retreiver Trainer Pat Nolan working with a Max. This clip shows left and right over left and right back off leash *with a six month old puppy working on e-collar.*


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Evan- I like moving the obstacle back. Sending through old fall, progression. I've always moved the line back-but see more value this way. I would keep it simple as well, but would it be better the further out to widen the bale to two or three bales wide? One bale of straw is 3' at 100 yards that's pretty narrow a picture. Am I making it to easy?


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

I always start out recalling over an obstacle for young dogs and by the time I progress to incorporate into my lining drills and the tt it's a none factor.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> No that is not the first video I posted this is..
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESo_9NteESA
> 
> ...



http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showpost.php?p=544299&postcount=53

this is where you posted the video in question.

john


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Pals said:


> Evan- I like moving the obstacle back. Sending through old fall, progression. I've always moved the line back-but see more value this way. I would keep it simple as well, but would it be better the further out to widen the bale to two or three bales wide? One bale of straw is 3' at 100 yards that's pretty narrow a picture. Am I making it to easy?


I'd say it's a matter of which dog. Some need it broken down more than others. I like your thinking because I'm an advocate for the dog, and that makes me prone to over simplify, rather than under-simplify. None of this stuff was their idea. It was ours!

Also, I think if a dog is moving along okay without widening the obstacle, he's progressing faster than you may think. He has to focus longer and harder as the obstacle becomes more distant. If he struggles too much because of having reached a certain distance, widening it may be just what he needs.

Evan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

john fallon said:


> http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showpost.php?p=544299&postcount=53
> 
> this is where you posted the video in question.
> 
> john


That is the second video I posted. He uses the collar to send the dog to the board then he "throws the bumper as a reward."


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> Once more for clarity; only one obstacle, moved out from session to session as we read the dog is ready for it. How are we doing so far?
> 
> Evan


So far so good. 
The dog has to progressively run farther and farther before reaching the obstacle.




Pals said:


> I would keep it simple as well, but would it be better the further out to widen the bale to two or three bales wide? One bale of straw is 3' at 100 yards that's pretty narrow a picture.


I can see the benefit of making the obstacle it wider. A single bale of hay 40+ yards away is a tiny, tiny target and wouldn't take much to veer around. I know my dog would skate around it in no time...heck my marksmanship skills are such that I'm not even sure if i could hit a single bale of hay 40+ yards away with a shotgun.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> So far so good.
> The dog has to progressively run farther and farther before reaching the obstacle.
> 
> I can see the benefit of making the obstacle it wider. A single bale of hay 40+ yards away is a tiny, tiny target and *wouldn't take much to veer around*.


Now, let's say Popsicle has digested this idea, and has been lining over the obstacle without handling or correction at - say, 60 yards. If you don't need to narrow the obstacle, and the dog continues to succeed, can you see that this represents a higher degree of skill to build on, rather than electively widening the obstacle?

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> Now, let's say Popsicle has digested this idea, and has been lining over the obstacle without handling or correction at - say, 60 yards. If you don't need to narrow the obstacle, and the dog continues to succeed, can you see that this represents a higher degree of skill to build on, rather than electively widening the obstacle?
> 
> Evan


Heck yes. 

Guess I'm just being overly cautious about testing Popsicle. I'd hate to have her fail (but then again...that failure would create a teaching moment...and I'm not overly sure I posses the skills necessary to teach her how to cross a single bale of hay at 60 yards if she did skate around it).


----------



## Matthew Hambright (Dec 6, 2009)

PackLeader said:


> That's what separates the pros from the Joes.



Cmon Packleader! So what your saying is your a "pro" and I'm just a "Joe"...LOL Packleader I like you a whole heck of a lot, and I know your a pro, pro at running your mouth, hey I just asked a question, and Im not worried if you use a E collar to "teach", I just wouldnt want you in a 21 mile radius of my dog!

Jesus Loves You!


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Okay- how would you read this. Dog drives out for 80 yards on land goes through a corner of water-gets wet but scrapes the edge, not the line I want, retrieves bird. He comes back honest, even slightly fat-AND looks over at the edge. Hmmmm 

He does this on long land entries before narrow water bodies or corners.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> That is the second video I posted. He uses the collar to send the dog to the board then he "throws the bumper as a reward."


In an effort to sort this out, will you articulate what your definition of a "Cold" correction is ?

john


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

Evan said:


> Have I helped?
> 
> Evan


Yes sir, appreciate the feedback!!  I'm not a "Cold" user, nor plan to be!!


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Pals said:


> Okay- how would you read this. Dog drives out for 80 yards on land goes through a corner of water-gets wet but scrapes the edge, not the line I want, retrieves bird. He comes back honest, even slightly fat-AND looks over at the edge. Hmmmm
> 
> He does this on long land entries before narrow water bodies or corners.


Nancy,

There are many people in the same situation. May I ask you to hold this good thought for when we're a little further along in this? I know it's a good question. We just aren't there yet. Is that okay?

Evan


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Yep-got until say March! That's when the wetland will be thawed. In the meantime I'm going to go get some straw bales.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

Evan, thanks for the thread topic. With each new pup, the routine of deflaring ends up slightly modified for the next. This thread has given me some new ideas to incorporate. Many are much further along on this than I am, and I can only speak from my personal experiences. 

Quite by accident the "log off line" issue cropped up when working at our club's training grounds. Apparantly, if a dog is being drilled on jumping over obstacles, the expectation to "not flare" becomes the norm. They begin to look for them. This thread jogged my memory enough to rethink what was going on. 

After teaching the new expectation (not flaring), if a dog sees a log slightly off line (see last photo).....suction will occur. I had to move up (a lot) and teach Daisy to "not jump every log" in sight....just the one on line. Frankly, this was not an easy thing to accomplish. No collar was used, and we had some confusion for awhile. The "wrinkle" was finally extinguished with close-up attrition (no e-collar). 

In retrospect, I now realize Daisy's perception may not have been "keeping a line" but learning she just wasn't supposed to jump "that particular log" (the off line one). What may require some thought is how to achieve a balance related to maintaining a straight line. This will involve random exposures with choices. 

For example, a mark is thrown beyond a log which is 15 yards off line. The dog eventually encounters the "area of the log" and it becomes a suctioning target (to jump) because of an expectation established in her present deflaring skill work. How to teach a dog to see things with respect to "the line" may be more difficult than simply reacting to a basic mental picture created in a drill. 

A parallel to this issue would be a dog that "goes off line" to "get his feet wet" even though water was not on a direct line to the mark. Establishing some sort of balance on the deflaring concept might be a good idea. The dog needs to think about the task at hand which means more random exposures with choices. 

Therefore, this thread has caused me to rethink the extensions of the deflaring drill. I have run the drill with the jump placed so the dog must jump over it at angles (different lines), but up until now I've never thought about running drills where the correct line is not over the jump (passing by). It is still "out there"....but off line. The "higher" expectation would require more focus on going straight no matter what. Eventually, obstacles need to be taught as suction *or* flare *depending on the line*. 

A possible start on this would be to make another jump. Place them with an equal sized space between them and run successive lines over, through, angled over or through and passed.....up close first. The line would be the emphasis....what's "in the way would be dealt with" no matter what.....depending on the line. The focus must be to "go straight" not perform tricks. 

I'm just brainstorming here. Any input (that doesn't involve an e-collar)? 

edit: Sorry Nancy, I missed the posts on "getting wet". I need to spend less time on the Internet......New Year's resolution #1. Back to "lurk mode".


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

KwickLabs said:


> Evan, thanks for the thread topic. With each new pup, the routine of deflaring ends up slightly modified for the next. This thread has given me some new ideas to incorporate. Many are much further along on this than I am, and I can only speak from my personal experiences.
> 
> ....After teaching the new expectation (not flaring), if a dog sees a log slightly off line (see last photo).....*suction will occur*. I had to move up (a lot) and teach Daisy to "not jump every log" in sight....just the one on line. Frankly, this was not an easy thing to accomplish. No collar was used, and we had some confusion for awhile. The "wrinkle" was finally extinguished with close-up attrition (no e-collar).....
> 
> I'm just brainstorming here. *Any input* (that doesn't involve an e-collar)?


Thanks, Jim. I would regard such behavior as a read that my drilling on this has gotten out of balance. Sometimes we're so diligent that we become myopic about a concept like this, and we don't do enough to keep our dogs more relaxed about just going straight.

I started the practice years ago of keeping a journal. When anything like this came up, I altered my daily practice to make sure my focused drill work didn't start producing parlor tricks, so to speak.

For a dog going through the drill we've been talking about that shows this "suction" behavior - anywhere - I would still go back to my drill as my usual training schedule called for, but I would run a tossed bumper, or even a little blind or two just a few degrees off to one side of the obstacle or another. It usually doesn't take much to offset the suction issue. We just have to be alert for it.

In the meantime, we run our usual set of marks each day usually prior to running any drill work.

Evan


----------



## Uncle Bill (Jan 18, 2003)

Admittedly, coming to the 'party' late. 

My first impressions is again the pizzin' contest the various 'egos' have to force on those wanting to learn.

Secondly, like Doug, I at first had a view that this is, "in our training circle" considered de-cheating, and the term 'flaring' was reserved for another fault that needed correction. As explained by Evan, it's linguistical, so of very little concern, and certainly not problematic.

My delving into this type of 'training' was purely for fun. Several of us in our group would teach our dogs to go over hay bale stacks 3 high. These are the 12 to 14 hundred lb round bales, that get put into stacks in our neck of the woods, containing as many as 38 bales, stackmover sizes.

We would teach the dogs to go over these stacks both ways...width and length. Then we'd have a contest as to how far away we could get, and still have the dogs go over the stack BOTH going and coming, regardless of the angle we chose to run them. What super fun, and the dogs loved it almost as much as a duck-chasing contest.

The conundrum that developed was as Jim B explains:

"parallel to this issue would be a dog that "goes off line" to "get his feet wet" even though water was not on a direct line to the mark. Establishing some sort of balance on the deflaring concept might be a good idea. The dog needs to think about the task at hand which means more random exposures with choices. 

Therefore, this thread has caused me to rethink the extensions of the deflaring drill. I have run the drill with the jump placed so the dog must jump over it at angles (different lines), but up until now I've never thought about running drills where the correct line is not over the jump (passing by). It is still "out there"....but off line. The "higher" expectation would require more focus on going straight no matter what. Eventually, obstacles need to be taught as suction *or* flare *depending on the line*. "


When we were initially 'teaching' our dogs this game, we started with the single bale, much like what Evan illustrated, and similar in the way Ken did, and Jim showed us with his paraphernalia. After teaching the dogs to jump over these bales, we discovered some of them going out of their way...diverting if you will... on their way to a 'blind', to jump over a hay bale as much as 10 feet off line.

Of course when this first occurred we all laughed and thought it was fantastic how that dog had 'reasoned' that out for what I suspect it thought would provide additional praise and "atta boys". Then it dawned on us, that this may become detrimental if we were running a trial in a hay field of uncollected bales. That wasn't unheard of in those days...those bales provided great ways to 'retire' a gun.

We also noticed, when we continued our training to the water de-cheating, this 'diverting', as in Jim's illustration, was again happening. (Since I don't wish to get the cart before the horse here, I will stop on the water situation, and wait until that becomes the focus of... another thread???)

Concerning the hay bale jumping, after we left those fields with single bales for a while, and then returned after the farmer had them stacked, and we got into our 'fun' games, which didn't take the dog's long to learn BTW, we never had any further hay bale incidents while line running to a blind. Never did run any tests with hay bale stacks in the field with that dog, but that might have gotten interesting if we had.

UB

(sorry 'bout this Evan, apparently we were posting at the same time)


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

No problem, Bill.

I anticipated coming to this point...just not so soon. We can discuss any aspect of this that anyone has a concern about. I appreciate the input.

Evan


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Quote UB.....My first impressions is again the pizzin' contest the various 'egos' have to force on those wanting to learn.

Totally agree with ya UB........this thread has been a good one except for the occasional Northeasterner wind that whistle threw from time to time.....

Played with the flaring concept in training today to give da dawgs some additional food for thought.........and will probably revisit it again tomorrow.....

We had a productive day with it.........Thanks Evan...........;-)


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Evan,

What part of what I said made you believe I use cold burns?

Also Mikes flow chart says use the e-collar to enforce obedience and to and from the line. Doesn't that help at all for flaring issues?


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Evan,
> 
> What part of what I said made you believe I use _*cold burns*_?
> 
> Also Mikes flow chart says use the e-collar to enforce obedience and to and from the line. Doesn't that help at all for flaring issues?


For me, it has yet to be determined if you actually know the clinical definition of the term _cold collar correction_.

john


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

According to you it has nothing to do with the dog knowing the command. According to Evans description it does.

I don't have the lardy DVDs but I can see from the flow chart it's used for all kinds of things. Just trying to figure out why everydog at this point still has a flaring issue.. I Would love to hear when that fits into all of this and how.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

> According to you it has nothing to do with the dog knowing the command. According to Evans description it does.


I went back to check on this. It appears to me that Evan's statement is congruent. 



> I can see from the flow chart it's used for all kinds of things


So you "got that" from Lardy's chart. People train for years using his methods, attend his seminars many times and they still find out they don't know it all. Have you ever done anything remotely related to Lardy's sequence of retriever training? Done any transition work lately? ever? 



> why every dog at this point still has a flaring issue


That's been discussed and explained several times in this thread. Reading, understanding and remembering are useful skills. 



> I Would love to hear when that fits into all of this and how.


I'm not exactly sure what "when, this and how" mean to you, but the discussions have dealt with the "why and how" quite well inspite of all the e-collar and OB tangents. 

It might be a more informative approach if you did some of this "stuff" so that there would be some common knowledge of what is taking place. It is a lot easier to ask and learn in the context being discussed. And it can be especially "interesting" when an effective program is continually discussed by someone that has never "worked it". 

Now I understand there may be other ways to do things, but when one doesn't know what de-flaring is and on top of that doesn't know why a dog flares at all, wouldn't it be wiser to listen and learn? "This is what I think I would try" is not going to impress anyone that already has. 

I learned a long time ago it is easier to learn by mostly listening, watching and doing....rather than simply playing a "devil's advocate" from a far off and uninformed platform. Just sayin'. 

That's 34 posts with the first one asking "if de-flaring was an OB drill" and ending with "wondering why all these dogs need to be de-flared". In between, there were all the unnecesary e-collar tangents......'cause that is really another topic. So about 70 posts (including a conservative estimate of retorts to the tangents) just consumed bandwidth.......in my opinion. 

Read your Website...well written and easy to read. However, seeking information is not a universal skill.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

I'm just trying to figure out how the e-collar was used in all the other previous drills leading to this point. I think much of it has to do with running straight lines.

I'm just trying to learn like everyone else I'm not playing devils anything..


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

KwickLabs said:


> It might be a more informative approach if you did some of this "stuff" so that there would be some common knowledge of what is taking place. It is a lot easier to ask and learn in the context being discussed. And it can be especially "interesting" when an effective program is continually discussed by someone that has never "worked it".
> 
> Now I understand there may be other ways to do things, but when one doesn't know what de-flaring is and on top of that doesn't know why a dog flares at all, wouldn't it be wiser to listen and learn? "This is what I think I would try" is not going to impress anyone that already has.
> 
> ...


Jim, a big AMEN to everything that you've written. 

Jamie, if you're truly interested in learning about retriever training for tests, trials and hunting, why don't you get in touch with Buck Shope at Swift River Retrievers (whom you had mentioned in a different thread) and avail yourself of what he has teach.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Does he train when it's -10?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> Evan,
> 
> What part of what I said made you believe I use cold burns?
> 
> Also Mikes flow chart says use the e-collar to enforce obedience and to and from the line. Doesn't that help at all for flaring issues?


Jamie,

This is a thread that most participants have expressed an interest in. It's been difficult. I'm going to be direct about this, and it isn't a personal afront. But if any of your posts *in this thread* do not constitute a discussion on topic, I plan to simply ignore them.

If you desire to discuss any other topic *in a different thread*, and you have questions for me, I'll be happy to reply. For the remainder of this thread I plan only to discuss the topic of cheating - specifically flaring & de-flaring physical structure. You are welcome to join that discussion.

If you continue off topic comments and questions in this thread, I'll happily leave it to others to reply. Nothing personal, but it's hard enough to keep this on track without side issues diluting the message.

Thanks,
Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> Jamie,
> 
> This is a thread that most participants have expressed an interest in. It's been difficult. I'm going to be direct about this, and it isn't a personal afront. But if any of your posts *in this thread* do not constitute a discussion on topic, I plan to simply ignore them.
> 
> ...


Great.
Now....where are we with Popscicle?


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

I have a couple questions trying to understand the difference between a "no-no" drill and what you are doing. 

What are your standards?

How are you correcting the dog?

When do you recall?

When do you handle?


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

PackLeader said:


> I'm just trying to figure out how the e-collar was used in all the other previous drills leading to this point. I think much of it has to do with running straight lines.
> 
> I'm just trying to learn like everyone else I'm not playing devils anything..


While it comes down to "straight lines", the use of the collar at just about any point in training (minus a few here and there) has to do with lack of effort versus lack of understanding. Dogs don't get corrected because they don't understand something. Dogs get corrected because there's a lack of effort. There is virtually nowhere in most modern training programs to use a cold burn, much less Mike Lardy's. The only thing I've used it for is male dogs that pee everywhere and dogs that put their noses where they shouldn't... But I don't think ever in anything related to retrievers.

And while "running straight lines" is a very superficial eventual goal of a good retriever training program, to me the end-all be-all is having a dog that handles what's presented to him, responds crisply and with a great attitude and AS A RESULT of these things, ends up running as straight a line as possible.

Like others, I would recommend that you actually get the material, read it and put it into practice in order to have a sensible discussion on the topics. 

On the hand of what's actually being discussed here... IMO, it tends to make a mountain out of a molehill. Some of it is so overally verbose, I can't read it.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Again, please tell me when I said use a cold burn?


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

PackLeader said:


> Again, please tell me when I said use a cold burn?


The post you made at 4:20am that says this: "I don't have the lardy DVDs but I can see from the flow chart it's used for all kinds of things." seems IN CONTEXT to be about cold burns. Maybe it's not...


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

I meant I would love to hear the e-collar methods used in Mikes or "someones" training program leading up to this point in Popsicles life..It says introduce direct and indirect pressure. At what point does that happen before or after this drill?


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> I meant I would love to hear the e-collar methods used in Mikes or "someones" training program leading up to this point in Popsicles life..It says introduce direct and indirect pressure. At what point does that happen before or after this drill?


Long, long before.

Popsicle is in transition.

All basics are done.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> I meant I would love to hear the e-collar methods used in Mikes or "someones" training program leading up to this point in Popsicles life..It says introduce direct and indirect pressure. At what point does that happen before or after this drill?


PackLeader,

Does this mean that you, probably the most active poster in this ongoing, fairly unproductive training discussion, are not familiar with Mike's program and are merely going off of a one page flowchart?

I never posted Mike's flowchart as a substitute for understanding Mike's program. I posted it in the very beginning, because it looked like a "no-no" drill to me.

If I were a newbie to retriever training, my head would be spinning so much from this thread, I'd have no idea where to start.....

Chris


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

At the start Evan was asking me questions about my directional training. I wasn't going off the flowchart I just wanted to know the correction methods used up to this point. 

I'm not arguing just trying to figure out whats going on. Never mind ill shut up now..


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN LAB said:


> Great.





TN LAB said:


> Now....where are we with Popsicle?


We’re at whatever point someone has a question about. But so far we’ve discussed getting her to a point at which she is showing much reduced tendency to flare every prominent structure she encounters en route to a fall. And we’ll go over any part of the process anyone would like.

What no one has asked or voiced an opinion about are the real goals and objectives of this type of de-flaring. So, I think it would be good to start with that. 

It would be easy to trivialize this drill work by assuming that we think our dogs will go through this de-flaring program, and will then line over or through any such obstacles in their path ‘til death. No such dog exists. A dog that would be so inclined is likely to be the out-of-balance dog Kwick Labs referred to, which would weaken some other aspect of the dog’s fieldwork.

What we’re after here is more reasonable than that. We just want a dog that isn’t _flare crazy_ to the point that we have a hack-fest trying to navigate a log or any such structure en route to a fall, especially a blind. Whether you run trials or hunt tests, you’ll run many blinds with such structure at some point in the route. It’s there on purpose. Blind retrieves are a test of trainability and willingness to take direction from the handler. Lining across it, or perhaps needing only one or two sharp handles is obviously going to outscore a 15-whistle hack job.

Once we’ve done our drill work to de-flare in this manner, we’ll need to maintain it. We will also need to keep other aspects of the dog's training in balance, as well. But let’s get back to Popsicle, and continue her education.

Evan


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

PackLeader said:


> I meant I would love to hear the e-collar methods used in Mikes or "someones" training program leading up to this point in Popsicles life..It says introduce direct and indirect pressure. At what point does that happen before or after this drill?


Before.....


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Doug Main said:


> I have a couple questions trying to understand the difference between a "no-no" drill and what you are doing.


Doug,

Thanks for your good questions. I’ll take them one at a time, and try to make sense of where I’m coming from on this. First, I mentioned earlier in response to Chris’ post that I don’t subscribe to the idea that there is such a thing as a “No-no drill”, but rather I believe there are a number of de-flaring drills and exercises so constructed that they’re most effectively run by using the “No-no” procedure. There are times when the same exercise or drill could be configured in such a manner that handling would be more appropriate that using “No-no”.

Whether a trainer chooses to handle or use “No-no” procedure, they are sending the same message, essentially – at least within a de-flaring context; “You’re going the wrong way. Go _this_ way”. We can discuss the rationale for deciding which to use, if you like.


Doug Main said:


> What are your standards?


My standards are fluid as the dog moves through this process. That’s why I like Ken’s approach in the beginning. I’m not going to take an unschooled dog out and insist that he line across a prominent structure like a log or hay bale, and certainly would not hold a standard for it because the dog has no education yet.

Kwick said be beings roughly the same way, but calls the dog to him to get it going, and that is exactly how I do it. The blending of those approaches makes a great deal of sense to me because they are dog friendly, and serve to make a manmade function readily acceptable to dogs. That is an ongoing theme in my training.

To further answer this question, my standards rise as the dog’s skill level becomes better established, and he or she is showing my that understanding in the field at progressively greater distance from the obstacle. That takes us you your next question.


Doug Main said:


> How are you correcting the dog?


I’m using different correction mechanisms at different points for the reasons mentioned above. At first, because we will work from very close distances, and because a green dog will tend to view such obstacles as more of a barrier than as something easy to navigate, I normally use a lightweight application of “No-no”.

To advance the application, I not only want the dog to flare less at progressing distances, I also want to be able to handle them over the obstacle as I will in live action later on, and I want them to handle across such things with minimal handling. So, as the dog progresses though his/her education on this, I move away from “No-no”, and insert more handling for route deviation. Make sense?


Doug Main said:


> When do you recall?


This question and the next one are addressed above. But I can post up a video clip later to show examples, if you like, and if it’s okay with Chris.


Doug Main said:


> When do you handle?


I’ll say at this point that if I’m using handling, I stop and cast the instant I see the dog’s nose come past her ear to deviate her route. If I’m using “No-no” I gradually move from allowing the dog to reach a maximum point of flare to say “No”, then recall, then re-send, gradually to a point at which my “No” comes at the initial point of flare; narrowing an allowable corridor as I go. The video will show this more clearly. That’s why I think multimedia teaching is best.

Evan


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

How about if the dog must cross the log(bale) at an acute angle to stay on line ?

john


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

john fallon said:


> How about if the dog must cross the log(bale) at an acute angle to stay on line ?
> 
> john


It's essentially the same thing, John. But I also understand where you're going. We will have to combine factors as we go along, and diagonals are an important element. Once we have Popsicle going strong on this, we'll be compounding factors.

Good question.

Evan


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

Evan, I had always thought of this type of drill as an obstacle drill...sort of go straight over the obstacle because that is the line. Maybe there is some factor that would cause the dog to be lost if it deviated by flaring the obstacle.

What I have been reading so far has caused me to wonder if this drill (in the dog's mind) is close to de-cheating in the water.

The reason I ask is because it has finally gotten too cold here, at least for the next couple of weeks, for water work. If I practice this drill (my dog is in transition) could I expect it to translate to and help with the concept of water de-cheating in the spring?


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

PackLeader said:


> If I can stand 6 feet from the bail and tell the dog back and he jumps over then I would start with that. If he refuses to go over from a close distance even for a toy I would teach him over using a leash and collar.


When dogs are at this point in training, they're far beyond leashes and toys. Going over the obstacle is not a big deal. It's going over en route when sent on back.


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

Evan, can we further explore the "out of balance" dog that KwikLabs describes?

Of course, we want to _try_ to not let the dog _get_ out of balance but it happens. And usually, the dog that is quicker to pickup on the concept is also the dog that will go out of his way to find a log, bale, water, etc.  So, once a dog is allowed to get out of balance in that way, what specifically, do you do to remedy that? I'm thinking things like wagon wheel lining with artificial obstacles placed so the dog goes over/through on some lines but around on others.

Other drills?

How tight would the lines be?

Difference between young transition dogs vs. advancing dogs?

Details?

Thanks,

JS


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Leddyman said:


> Evan, I had always thought of this type of drill as an obstacle drill...sort of go straight over the obstacle because that is the line. Maybe there is some factor that would cause the dog to be lost if it deviated by flaring the obstacle.


Terry,

Thanks for the question. I’m a trainer who prefers to simplify – not only for dogs, but also for people. It’s a de-flaring drill that has as its focus de-flaring for obstacles. As we’ve discussed earlier, there are a number of influences that cause dogs not to go straight. This is only one. You are correct in that the factor (the obstacle) entices dogs to flare it (run around it). We are simply reducing the dog’s tendency to do this, and at the same time making it easier for the handler to cast the dog over such things.


Leddyman said:


> What I have been reading so far has caused me to wonder if this drill (in the dog's mind) is close to de-cheating in the water.


It has a relationship to that very broad category of work because we’re focusing on training our dogs to go straight when conditions entice them not to.


Leddyman said:


> The reason I ask is because it has finally gotten too cold here, at least for the next couple of weeks, for water work. If I practice this drill (my dog is in transition) could I expect it to translate to and help with the concept of water de-cheating in the spring?


It can’t be expected to directly translate into de-cheating on water because of the unique character of water and shoreline influences. But it still can be expected to help, inasmuch as it’s still a matter of going straight when influenced not to. Make sense?

Evan


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

Pals said:


> Okay- how would you read this. Dog drives out for 80 yards on land goes through a corner of water-gets wet but scrapes the edge, not the line I want, retrieves bird. He comes back honest, even slightly fat-AND looks over at the edge. Hmmmm
> 
> He does this on long land entries before narrow water bodies or corners.


#1) Had he had all the work he needs to run a cheaty mark?

#2) Why did you let him continue after he didn't give you the line you wanted?

#3) Was it a lack of effort or lack of understanding? Understanding reverts back to #1, effort to #2.

-K


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

PackLeader said:


> You can tell better from this video when he is using the collar to push the dog back to the board..
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyrRO0a7MeM


While that is the one single place where he MAY have used the collar, the odds that he did are slim. A dog that has already been properly forced on water, which Goodie probably has been since Pat is swimming her by at the end of the video, will respond crisply to a repeated back.

It sounds like you think that just because the collar is in hand, it's being used. The collar is always in hand IN CASE it needs to be used. But there are many lessons where it's just plain in hand.

Based on Pat's narration, I believe that the only remote possible use of the collar is where you say it is used but I doubt it highly. And your reference was to a cold burn. IF it was used there, it wasn't a cold burn.

Pat said they've only been back in the water a short time, that this is still a new lesson to her. Most likely he "helped" her on that back to the crate by just throwing his arm up. I can't imagine him giving a correction there after she had to that point had a very willing, positive lesson.

I'll be glad to ask him on FB for you, though.

-K


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Kristie-

Yep he has been decheated-lots of cheatin singles. If I show him a corner or channel he knows what he needs to do, when we are within 20 yards or closer he does not "hug" the shore. 

He is in the water, not running the shore. He comes back fat-as if I know I can't be close to the shore on this line.


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

Pals said:


> Kristie-
> 
> Yep he has been decheated-lots of cheatin singles. If I show him a corner or channel he knows what he needs to do, when we are within 20 yards or closer he does not "hug" the shore.
> 
> He is in the water, not running the shore. He comes back fat-as if I know I can't be close to the shore on this line.


ok, then why is he allowed to complete the retrieve if he cheats?


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Is he cheating if he is in the water? Knowing Ryder he won't hug the shore on closer stuff-but he does it the longer the land entry is-so I handle him. Stop bring him back to the point of entry and make him take the correct line. 

He will also take a beautiful line if I show it to him up close then repeat further back. So I consider this "habit" of his on memory marks in this situation a lack of effort.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

JS said:


> Evan, can we further explore the "out of balance" dog that KwikLabs describes?
> 
> Of course, we want to _try_ to not let the dog _get_ out of balance but it happens. And usually, the dog that is quicker to pickup on the concept is also the dog that will go out of his way to find a log, bale, water, etc.  So, once a dog is allowed to get out of balance in that way, what specifically, do you do to remedy that? I'm thinking things like wagon wheel lining with artificial obstacles placed so the dog goes over/through on some lines but around on others.
> 
> ...


JS,

You've asked quite a lot. But I'll try to keep it simple.

Let's just address the out-of-balance dog that is this way due to over doing this drill or program of drills. That will make it easier to keep the treatment in line with all your questioning.

Wagon Wheel Lining drill: I would not tend to use it as a treament for this because it isn't related to it. I would not tend to add other factors into a WWD because the quarters are so confined that the "yeses" would be hard to discern from the "No's". Instead, I would prefer to treat the problem in the atmosphere where the dog's perceptions got out of balance.

Up front, I'll tell you the treatment would be more individualized than simply determining whether the dog was an early transition dog vs. a fully trained one. Let's go back to where the problem was created.










First, please understand that this is offered as a single example of my thinking about a solution. It isn't the one and only way to approach it. It's just to get you thinking in a healthy way about a solution. Knowing where suction has been created, I would do something like this.

Put two gunners out, in this case creating a converging (or "pinched") double. Begin with single throws. But first, just to simplify, move out with your dog to a closer position, and off line to open up the marks, and to place the obstacle between them. Throw and retrieve the closer (left hand) mark first.

There is close proximity between the bales and the fall, but the dog doesn't have to pass the obstacle on his way to the fall, so he's apt to just go to the fall. That gets it going.

Then throw the longer (right hand) mark, and retrieve it - handling only if necessary. No bumpers should be planted at the pile area at this time for what should be obvious reasons.

Move around from day to day alternating mark location, just to 'cool off' the suction area. Really, I've never had a dog with this problem, but that's about how I'd handle it if it came up.

Evan


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2010)

Pals said:


> Is he cheating if he is in the water? Knowing Ryder he won't hug the shore on closer stuff-but he does it the longer the land entry is-so I handle him. Stop bring him back to the point of entry and make him take the correct line.
> 
> He will also take a beautiful line if I show it to him up close then repeat further back. So I consider this "habit" of his on memory marks in this situation a lack of effort.


As far as whether he's cheating if he's in the water, it's up to you and the mark that's set up. Just being in the water does NOT mean NOT CHEATING.  I never ask for a perfect line, I ask for effort. 

It sounds like he may be toe-nailing - taking just enough water to be in the water, but not commit. 

If the line is incorrect, or his choice is incorrect I should say, you have a few choices...

If the entry shows a lack of effort, then either call back or handle depending on the nature of the lack of effort and how the mark is set up (how far he is from the line on entry, the acuteness of the angle if any, etc.). 

Once he's in the water, if his effort is minimal and he is TRYING ON PURPOSE to stay tight to shore, then I'd handle him, and later with a correction if it's ongoing.

If you're letting him complete the retrieve, then you're accepting his line and telling him it's appropriate. So why should he make any other choice?

-K


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Pals said:


> Is he cheating if he is in the water? Knowing Ryder he won't hug the shore on closer stuff-but he does it the longer the land entry is-so I handle him. Stop bring him back to the point of entry and make him take the correct line.
> 
> He will also take a beautiful line if I show it to him up close then repeat further back. So I consider this "habit" of his on memory marks in this situation a lack of effort.


He's cheating if he isn't going straight because he's flaring the water to an obvious degree, as you have described it. I'm with Kristie...he should be handled at the point where he begins to deviate his route, and taught to go straight. He should be corrected for failures to go, stop, or come as commanded - or for a clear lack of effort to overcome the shoreline factor he's been flaring.

It doesn't sound like a lack of effort, so much as a lack of instruction/training. But I sure wish this were tacked on to the latter part of this thread.

Evan


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Evan said:


> Thanks for your good questions. I’ll take them one at a time, and try to make sense of where I’m coming from on this. First, I mentioned earlier in response to Chris’ post that I don’t subscribe to the idea that there is such a thing as a “No-no drill”, but rather I believe there are a number of de-flaring drills and exercises so constructed that they’re most effectively run by using the “No-no” procedure. There are times when the same exercise or drill could be configured in such a manner that handling would be more appropriate that using “No-no”.
> 
> *Whether a trainer chooses to handle or use “No-no” procedure, they are sending the same message,* *essentially – at least within a de-flaring context; “You’re going the wrong way. Go this way”.* We can discuss the rationale for deciding which to use, if you like.My standards are fluid as the dog moves through this process. That’s why I like Ken’s approach in the beginning. I’m not going to take an unschooled dog out and insist that he line across a prominent structure like a log or hay bale, and certainly would not hold a standard for it because the dog has no education yet.


Thanks Evan,

I have a better understanding from where you are coming. 

I do use the "no-no" drill. I learned from Lardy that one of the primary purposes of the "no-no" drill is for the dog to understand the recall for a line correction. 

I generally haven't used any drill like this to "handle" a dog across an object. At what point do you do this? 

In wondering I may be missing something, by not doing this, I am thinking that by the time, I am ready to start casting dogs across objects in the field, that they already understand casting well enough that I don't have a problem.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Doug Main said:


> Thanks Evan,
> 
> I generally haven't used any drill like this to "handle" a dog across an object. At what point do you do this?
> 
> In wondering I may be missing something, by not doing this, I am thinking that by the time, I am ready to start casting dogs across objects in the field, that they already understand casting well enough that I don't have a problem.


Doug,

I generally begin to handle when I've read the circumstances make it a better choice. That is usually because I have a wider obstacle (like a log or tree limb, for example), and/or distance has revealed that Popsicle is now better focused on going straight & flaring less. Again, I'm not looking for perfection, so much as an effort to cast more accurately over obstacles.

I'm sure you've seen instances of "windshield-wiper" casting; you give a straight up right hand Back, and the dog casts Over around an obstacle (in this case), or you give a straight up left hand Back, and the dog casts Over around the other side. This also happens in reaction to tight slots, which we can get into later.

My point in doing this training is to reduce such inclinations so the dog will be more apt to rotate tightly and cast as sent. I've had the privilege of seeing many fine tests set up be smart judges, in which the dog would go out of sight for a protracted period if he flares an obstacle and hyper casts. What will cause your dog to do that isn't so much a weak casting standard as it is flaring influences in the field, combined with distance.

Evan


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> Great.
> Now....where are we with Popscicle?


I know it's been a challenge to keep track, but where do you envision us being about now with Popsicle? Where do you think we should go from here?

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> I know it's been a challenge to keep track, but where do you envision us being about now with Popsicle? Where do you think we should go from here?
> 
> Evan


Back to the fridge for another cold beer.  I'm getting a little dizzy trying to decipher where Popsicle is and what all these other posts are referring to. 

OK. Let me see.

1. We called Popsicle over the barrier a number of times and she was doing that just fine. We also tossed a couple marks over the barrier and she did that just fine...right?

2. We backed up and sent her to the pile, which required her to cross the barrier and handled her as necessary. 

3. Now, we're doing a couple pinched single marks and had no issues with that.

4. I suspect the next logical step would be to go back to the original line and send her for a blind retrieve over the obstacle...handling as needed.  Although my inclination is to shorten it up and run her for the back pile from 10-20 yards or so.

Perhaps a summary of the steps we've taken with Popsicle would be in order and a suggestion on what the next step is (that sure would be helpful to me).


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> Back to the fridge for another cold beer.  I'm getting a little dizzy trying to decipher where Popsicle is and what all these other posts are referring to.
> 
> OK. Let me see.
> 
> ...


I think you've summarized it nicely! Of course #3 was a side note for a special situation. But it was worthy of discussion on this topic. Good job! 

I'm interested in your inclination toward shortening it up at this point. She's doing well, and showing a good understanding of what's being asked of her. She will now set up, look out without her head glancing off to either side in antipation of flaring the obstacle, and will either line over the obstacle (whatever it is), or sharply handle over it - all with the obstacle roughly 80 yards away.

While we were building her skill to this point we've still been marking each day, and perhaps doing some Walking Baseball to help keep her casting in good form. 

So, where to now?

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> I'm interested in your inclination toward shortening it up at this point. She's doing well, and showing a good understanding of what's being asked of her.
> Evan


I guess my thought rather than go back to where we left off...shorten up just a bit so the concept is similar, but not quite as challenging. Therefore if you do have failure, you have eliminated one of the reasons for failure (distance) and would have reason to believe that somehow the marks with the obstacle "caused" the dog to forget everything it learned about how to run through the obstacle. Otherwise, if you get a failure, you might be asking..."was it the distance, or was it the stickmen/birdboys?"




Evan said:


> So, where to now?
> 
> Evan


???
Is it time to run the marks from the line? And then, give the obstacle a try?


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Evan-
It's your fault my pea froze today!! I dragged my sick, sneezing hacking rear out in the 12 degree balmy Illinois sun. Ryder loved the flaring drill, I was frozen but pleased with his work. No bales yet I used a nasty patch of cover with tempting mowed areas all around, pushed across a frozen creek and up the back of pond dam. Threw a mark off to the side, once we worked back to the mound. Treated it as poison to add some suction. 

Having some spiked hot chocolate right now. Colds stink and this weather is brutal.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> I guess my thought rather than go back to where we left off...shorten up just a bit so the concept is similar, but not quite as challenging. Therefore if you do have failure, you have eliminated one of the reasons for failure (distance) and would have reason to believe that somehow the marks with the obstacle "caused" the dog to forget everything it learned about how to run through the obstacle. Otherwise, if you get a failure, you might be asking..."was it the distance, or was it the stickmen/birdboys?"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Okay. Wouldn't hurt. I was just curious. Probably would not do it myself if I saw no call for it, but it sure wouldn't do any harm, either.

Nancy,

I accept!  Well done. Now bundle up, take mega doses of vitamin C, pat yourself on the back for a job well done, and get well!

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> Okay. Wouldn't hurt. I was just curious. Probably would not do it myself if I saw no call for it, but it sure wouldn't do any harm, either.
> 
> Evan


Fair enough. 

We've thrown a couple marks with success, now where do we go?


----------



## Desiree (Dec 27, 2009)

Bump. Bump.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Desiree said:


> Bump. Bump.


Thanks for the bump. I haven't forgotten. I'll post up on this tomorrow.

Evan


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Well, let’s take Popsicle on from here. You have a well-drilled skill. The dog is less apt to flare obstacles, and understands the standard well enough to efficiently handle over or through them without argument. But we can’t leave it there. That would be like doing all the de-flaring with “no-no” without setting up any set ups that develop handling. When you’re under judgment they won’t allow you to start over!

So I would start designing two or three of my cold blinds each week to contain a log or some such obstacle to transfer this skill to real applications in the field. During the same time, of course, we continue to mark each day, and maybe some other drill work for other aspects of the dog’s work.

Keep good notes. Your days on drill work for this may not be over.

Evan


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

As your cold blinds improve due to less obstacle flaring, I suggest involving multiple factors in subsequent blinds. Not only the same type, but in combinations. The more your dog focuses on going straight, the less distractible he becomes, so other influences will start to have less influence on his routes.

Suppose now that we assess Popsicle is doing better in this area, but we began to expose her to some fairly distant slots in addition to obstacles, and she's really resistant to them, especially tight ones. How would you now go about reducing her proclivity toward avoiding that type of factor?

Evan


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

Evan said:


> Suppose now that we assess Popsicle is doing better in this area, but we began to expose her to some fairly distant slots in addition to obstacles, and she's really resistant to them, especially tight ones. How would you now go about reducing her proclivity toward avoiding that type of factor?
> 
> Evan


Move closer so the slot opens up????


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

TN_LAB said:


> Move closer so the slot opens up????


That's a logical start.

Poor popsicle - she's got some 'holes' showing up in her performance as we move through transition, though. Good solid Basics, but she is starting to show us perhaps a lack of courage, or maybe she's just too darned smart! But as we advance her cold blinds we're finding more and more factors she avoids or falls for.

This 'slot' deal has her number right now. Whether offset or parallel, if it looks tight to her, she just won't challenge it, but instead runs around whatever structure forms the slot. When we handle she hyper casts. Our journal reveals this has become a clear pattern.

Now what?

Evan


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Evan said:


> As your cold blinds improve due to less obstacle flaring, I suggest involving multiple factors in subsequent blinds. Not only the same type, but in combinations. The more your dog focuses on going straight, the less distractible he becomes, so other influences will start to have less influence on his routes.
> 
> Suppose now that we assess Popsicle is doing better in this area, but we began to expose her to some fairly distant slots in addition to obstacles, and she's really resistant to them, especially tight ones. How would you now go about reducing her proclivity toward avoiding that type of factor?
> 
> Evan


Of course, simplifying by moving closer to get comfortable with the concept. Then, multiple blinds employing the same concept with ever increasing distances. Then, building back to your multiple factors. Depending upon the makeup of the dog, I'll use attrition but won't shy from the collar for lack of effort. And maintain a high standard for what is desired and what is acceptble. It's ultimately fairer for the dog and a better use of the trainer's time . There's nothing wrong with two steps forward and one step back. 

Part of the reason that the average age for an FC is six, is that it takes that long to adequately expose them to the advanced concepts that they'll encounter and to teach them the behaviors those concepts require.


----------



## GG (Jan 29, 2006)

I applaud your efforts Evan---you're a brave man!
GG


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Mark,

Excellent post! So good, in fact, that it's a tough act to follow. Those are all the principles I embrace as a trainer. Taking that good start on the problem, what do you anticipate doing to grow Popsicle's skill level as you go along? Or do you think this should normally resolve fairly quickly considering the previous work she's had?

Thanks, GG. I hear ya'.

Evan


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

OK, so I would approach the slot the same as any other obstacle. Just as we did with the log and following Goldenboy's concise outline.

So back to my dog, post #160, who is so intelligent in grasping new concepts that she is a challenge to keep in balance . Would you recommend mixing slots (going between) with obstacles (going over/through) in the same session? Same day, different session?

I'm thinking, show the difference in black & white ... follow my line; here we go over ... here we go between.

Or would you concentrate on just the slots for now and combine the concepts later? As in, "one thing at a time?"

JS


----------



## Snicklefritz (Oct 17, 2007)

I'll throw some ideas in here, even though I"m not anywhere near that level with my dog.

Going back to Kwicklabs posts starting at #41, I like the low, very wide jump, because the dog (me thinks) will find it easier to go over than around.

If you take the same concept, you could use two of those jumps with a space between them (large at first, then shrinking) and send the dog through the opening until he begins to get the idea. Then you could widen the gap again, and begin backing up. If that is succesful you might start with a wide gap again, and start running angles through the slot.

Moving to the field, it would be great to run through an open gate in a fence that seperates two pastures. I would be impossible for the dog to flare. Then you could set up holding blinds and run between them, and so on, substituting different objects or terrain features.

Might work...just some thoughts.

Snick


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

Here's a little fun drill I use to slot condition a dog. The slot sizes can be altered as the skill level (and comfort) increases. Moving up or back makes it an easy drill "to work". All my dogs seem to love it. I have several different slot drills that look quite different. 

note: Those are full body mallard and goose decoys. 

*"decoy slot lining drill"*









The slot program progresses to medium distance, complex cold blinds like this set of three (theme blinds). The key factor is each slot is "close-up" at first and much farther away on the return. If you look closely there are wide "slots" through decoys, too.

The next step is to do reverse blinds (from the other side). The final step (in this sequence) is running three blinds (from the far side) through very different slots. 

note: These three sessions are several days apart. 

*"first slot"*









*"second slot (if you look closely there are actually 4 slots)"*









*"third slot (kind of)"*


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Evan said:


> Well, let’s take Popsicle on from here. You have a well-drilled skill. The dog is less apt to flare obstacles, and understands the standard well enough to efficiently handle over or through them without argument. But we can’t leave it there. *That would be like doing all the de-flaring with “no-no” without setting up any set ups that develop handling. *When you’re under judgment they won’t allow you to start over!


Evan

Frankly from my experience, if the dog will line over an object, it will also handle over that object. It's kind of like the argument by those that claim lining the blind doesn't demonstrate control. ;-)

That's why I asked when you do this in your program. I do the "no-no" drill prior to starting cheating singles, as I feel the dog needs to understand the recall correction for a poor line, otherwise you are going to have bugging and no-goes to deal with later. 

I don't do the handling across the objects at this time, as I think it is counter productive to the dog's understanding of handling at this stage in the dog's development. By that I mean, I am just starting running cold blinds, all the handling is focused on just getting a direction change. 

As the dog gets more competent at running cold blinds, you tighten up the casting, start demanding more precise casting and tighter lines. At the same time you are running cheating singles, the dog learns and develops an understanding of going straight and the handling required for slight line corrections. Again as the dog becomes more competent, you start putting more factors in the way for the dog to fight. It's all done in the field using blinds and marking together.


----------



## Carol Cassity (Aug 19, 2004)

Kwicklabs - I really like the decoy slot idea. thanks for sharing the pics.

Carol


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Doug Main said:


> Evan
> 
> Frankly from my experience, if the dog will line over an object, it will also handle over that object. It's kind of like the argument by those that claim lining the blind doesn't demonstrate control. ;-)
> 
> ...


I understand, Doug. I think along those same lines. I don't know if you drill for No-hands Back, but I also train for that cast during the same period, and I find it usually tends to augment that lesson. If I give any cast that is accompanied by a hand gesture, there had better be a response that changes course.

That's one reason why I involve handling at this point. But I also want to know I'm not going to have a ping pong match in front of obstacles. I agree that de-flaring via No-no procedure will surely help. But I don't think it goes far enough.

We don't have to agree, of course. I just think it's all good discussion.

I will add in response to Kwick's good post that, with regard to slots, this is a point at which I would begin Chair Drills & Split Drills.

Evan


----------



## blind ambition (Oct 8, 2006)

I wanted to bump this up, there have been some terrific training threads on here lately and this is one of them. 

I am curious about the progression of this line of training and also the mechanics of its transfer into field marks and blinds. Which is best method to move from drills into the field, is it via blind work or marks? If the standard falls off in the field do we correct or should we return to drills?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

I can tell you how I tend to approach it with dogs that are in Transition. I handle it as I've already outlined; via drill work for skill development. I progress through focused drills for what I have identified as typical or common types of factors that cause line deviation until I have moved through more and more challenging presentations, and have seen the dog become less prone to deviate. 

When I'm reading that elevated effort to hold a truer line in the presence of those factors, I begin to move to the field with cold blinds containing similar obvious factors. I rarely run a single blind, but rather prefer double or triple blinds. Not all the blinds will be heavily factored, but one or two of them will be. I regard this as a logical progression.

Is that the sort of thing you were asking?

Evan


----------

