# How I throw my own marks (video)



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

http://gallery.me.com/fredhassen#100579 Me and 'Tank'


----------



## Todd Caswell (Jun 24, 2008)

I didn't watch all of it because it takes a long time to load but I don't understand the point of the bumper exchange, why not just have him deliver to you and then send him back to his "place"? Not saying it's right or wrong just courious why your doing it this way.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Todd Caswell said:


> I didn't watch all of it because it takes a long time to load but I don't understand the point of the bumper exchange, why not just have him deliver to you and then send him back to his "place"? Not saying it's right or wrong just courious why your doing it this way.


Why do a swim by? Just have the dog bring it to you, then send him to the other side. It's best to know both.


----------



## Mark Sehon (Feb 10, 2003)

You are teaching your dog to switch. This could cause a lot of trouble later if you run Hunt Test.


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Just curious. What level have you trained in this venue (hunt or field trial). That might explain some of your approach to training.


----------



## Bigdaddy (Jan 12, 2009)

I see why you have him to keep one in his mouth and exchange bumpers. But, I'm not sure if that will hurt you down the road if you run HT's. Changing bumpers is not something I would want my dog to do. Just saying.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Fred can train his dogs however he wants, no problemo, but newbies especially need to be aware that teaching a dog to switch bumpers on marks flies in the face of most retriever training. It is promoting a switch, which will get you dropped pronto in AKC. Most people train so their dog doesn't even shop a pile during yardwork, let alone carry a bumper to a mark, drop it and pick up the found one. Just a heads up for some, I'm not debating with Fred, he has his own agenda, but switching bumpers on marks is particularly questionable for someone new to retriever training to consider as standard procedure.


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

Rainmaker said:


> Fred can train his dogs however he wants, no problemo, but newbies especially need to be aware that teaching a dog to switch bumpers on marks flies in the face of most retriever training. It is promoting a switch, which will get you dropped pronto in AKC. Most people train so their dog doesn't even shop a pile during yardwork, let alone carry a bumper to a mark, drop it and pick up the found one. Just a heads up for some, I'm not debating with Fred, he has his own agenda, but switching bumpers on marks is particularly questionable for someone new to retriever training to consider as standard procedure.


Ditto... times 1000!!!

For "traditional HT training" you could have the dog deliver to you, then go back to the "place mat" or pylon.... then the dog wouldn't have to drop the bumper and switch....


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Hi Fred,

I do something very similar with my dog and I really enjoy it. I think it is hugely beneficial and like you say, it allows you to get lots of marks done without having to carry a whole lot of gear.

I'll make a suggestion, which you can choose to adopt or not.

Sit the dog at the cone but with nothing in his mouth....walk out and throw your mark. Release the dog with your voice. When the dog picks up the bumper, have the dog deliver to you, either in a front finish, or at your side. Take the bumper, line pup back to the cone.

You can start walking to your next spot as pup is running to the cone. I also like to put a mat down next to the cone (I use a white stickman next to a mat instead of cone...lighter weight - easier to carry, very visible) Now pup has to get on the mat and sit as he waits for your next throw.

I know folks are writing that spitting a bumper and switching to a new one is a negative. I tend to agree. I know you are probably wondering if the pup delivering to you will translate over to pup delivering to the birdboy in a hunt test. I will state that I think they know the difference and if you are the handler, they know to deliver to you whether you are at the line, or out there throwing the mark.

Good luck and thanks for the video.

Chris


----------



## Mark Sehon (Feb 10, 2003)

Spitting the birds on diversions is the ? Just trying to help. I also do ALOT of stand a lones.


----------



## BHB (Apr 28, 2008)

I'm thinking of that diversion bird in a HT that is shot out in front or to the side and sometimes over the dog as he returns with a previous mark. If the dog switches ducks he's out of the test. Switching bumpers like this would be the last thing I would teach a dog. Even for a hunting scenario I wouldn't want him to switch. I usually want him to go past a diversion bird dead in the decoys for that wounded bird 50yds+ away.
JMHO. 


BHB


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I do alot of stand alones too, but I often will leave the dog where I receive it from picking up the mark and walk to my next station vs sending the dog back to the original line. I create a new line with each mark. I'll work a whole field this way, getting in 6-10 marks anywhere from 80-200 yards each, varying the terrain, wind & other factors. I end up back where I park so I can get the next dog out and start over. This lets me walk the line the dog is going to take to the AOF too, more or less, so I can check for hazards, save myself a trip.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Hi Fred,
> 
> I do something very similar with my dog and I really enjoy it. I think it is hugely beneficial and like you say, it allows you to get lots of marks done without having to carry a whole lot of gear.
> 
> ...


Yes Chris, I believe it should be done both ways to better proof the dog. I believe it's a lot more difficult to cast and send a dog with a bumper in his mouth, then it is without one. One question in your case, I assume that when you send the dog back to his starting point after his delivery to you........I assume you use a remote drop from there?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

fredhassen said:


> Yes Chris, I believe it should be done both ways to better proof the dog. I believe it's a lot more difficult to cast and send a dog with a bumper in his mouth, then it is without one. One question in your case, I assume that when you send the dog back to his starting point after his delivery to you........I assume you use a remote drop from there?


I don't. I have the dog deliver to me at my side. I get him aligned towards the mat, take delivery of the bumper to hand, then line him back to the mat. Or, like some others have mentioned, I may take the bird, leave pup sitting right where he delivered, and I walk to a new spot. 

I do teach "remote drop", but I try to keep it super-clear in pup's mind that shopping/switching and such is not an option. In general, if pup picks it up, his job is to put it in my hand, unless he is specifically told otherwise...and that's rare for me, by design.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

BHB said:


> I'm thinking of that diversion bird in a HT that is shot out in front or to the side and sometimes over the dog as he returns with a previous mark. If the dog switches ducks he's out of the test. Switching bumpers like this would be the last thing I would teach a dog. Even for a hunting scenario I wouldn't want him to switch. I usually want him to go past a diversion bird dead in the decoys for that wounded bird 50yds+ away.
> JMHO.
> 
> 
> BHB


The dog is trained to only drop the bumper at the other bumper. Believe me, this is much more difficult than it looks. Perhaps you guys need to see it on a lining drill or a 'T' type of set up. I think you guys think that he's just going to run out there and drop it and chase after whatever else is out there, or switch. Quite the opposite. It's a lot more difficult to hold a line this way, and that's why he should know both. I will do a video of a lining drill with it, and you will see that he wouldn't just go running all over creation chasing things and dropping bumpers.  Much harder to hold a line this way.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

fredhassen said:


> The dog is trained to only drop the bumper at the other bumper. Believe me, this is much more difficult than it looks. Perhaps you guys need to see it on a lining drill or a 'T' type of set up. I think you guys think that he's just going to run out there and drop it and chase after whatever else is out there, or switch. Quite the opposite. It's a lot more difficult to hold a line this way, and that's why he should know both. I will do a video of a lining drill with it, and you will see that he wouldn't just go running all over creation chasing things and dropping bumpers.  Much harder to hold a line this way.


I didn't see anyone writing or suggesting anything about your dog running all over and chasing things.

I've personally seen many a judged event where the diversion bird hits the dog in the head, or lands directly under the dog's nose. In these cases, the dog has zero time to think. He just reacts. If the conditioned response in the drill as shown is to drop bumper A and pick up B, the one he just got to, it is reasonable for folks to express helpful concern to try and help you avoid trouble.

It's been pointed out to me before that folks much more successful than I do things differently. I'm not trying to tell you that what you do is wrong.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

It is part of T work, at least the way I was taught, to have the dog run the T with a bumper in mouth, but they are not taught to switch that bumper out for another one. I can't think of any reason to do so in retriever training, when not switching is a lesson most of us try to ingrain to our dogs. If my dog is handling, it will handle with a bumper or bird in mouth, same as without one, that's part of the drill and something I use throughout training even on older dogs as a tune up, as do many others I've trained with, including pros, just not the switching part.


----------



## BHB (Apr 28, 2008)

fredhassen said:


> The dog is trained to only drop the bumper at the other bumper. Believe me, this is much more difficult than it looks. Perhaps you guys need to see it on a lining drill or a 'T' type of set up. I think you guys think that he's just going to run out there and drop it and chase after whatever else is out there, or switch. Quite the opposite. It's a lot more difficult to hold a line this way, and that's why he should know both. I will do a video of a lining drill with it, and you will see that he wouldn't just go running all over creation chasing things and dropping bumpers.  Much harder to hold a line this way.


Defend it all you want but all I see is that you are teaching the dog that it is okay to switch. I see no use of this in hunting, HTs or FTs. 

BHB


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> I've personally seen many a judged event where the diversion bird hits the dog in the head, or lands directly under the dog's nose. In these cases, the dog has zero time to think. He just reacts. If the conditioned response in the drill as shown is to drop bumper A and pick up B, the one he just got to, it is reasonable for folks to express helpful concern to try and help you avoid trouble.


Exactly, that's where they love to throw them, time them right in front of the dog coming back and with being amped up and taken by surprise, they switch. Just because they haven't been doing diversions in SH lately, doesn't mean you don't train on them. You are training the the dog to switch on a diversion.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

I agree that disciplined casting should not involve the dog spitting a bumper and picking up a different one. 

I'm pretty simple-minded. So when it comes to stuff like this, I try to stay simple and condition pup that he better hold onto whatever he picked up...because if I didn't want him picking it up...he'd know it by now! And if he did pick it up, he better finish the job.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I don't. I have the dog deliver to me at my side. I get him aligned towards the mat, take delivery of the bumper to hand, then line him back to the mat. Or, like some others have mentioned, I may take the bird, leave pup sitting right where he delivered, and I walk to a new spot.
> 
> I do teach "remote drop", but I try to keep it super-clear in pup's mind that shopping/switching and such is not an option. In general, if pup picks it up, his job is to put it in my hand, unless he is specifically told otherwise...and that's rare for me, by design.


As I said, I feel it's good to do both and you don't. I still will continue to run the dog with a bumper in his mouth, and I am not trying to change anyone. I clearly said 'This is how I do it' and did not say 'this is what all of you should be doing'. Take care.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I agree that disciplined casting should not involve the dog spitting a bumper and picking up a different one.
> 
> I'm pretty simple-minded. So when it comes to stuff like this, I try to stay simple and condition pup that he better hold onto whatever he picked up...because if I didn't want him picking it up...he'd know it by now! And if he did pick it up, he better finish the job.


With all due respect, that is not the dog's conditioned response. If it was, I wouldn't be able to sit the dog on that bumper without dropping the one that he has in his mouth, nor would I be able to run him a million times right over that over that bumper, but still keep the one he has in his mouth and keep going. Furthermore, in the scenario you just gave me, I also wouldn't be able to have him sit there with you throwing things at his head without him dropping the one in his mouth and picking up those things that you throw. All of that would be impossible............would you like to see that as well? I assume not since you already seem to know all about my dogs conditioning, but I thought I'd throw it out there just the same.


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Hey Fred you need a subscription to Online Retriever and a seminar to either Lardy, Evans or Roreim. 

And then you will realize how little we all including you really know when it come to training dogs.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

I don't think there has been one thread of Fred's that's stayed friendly. As I read the posts all I can think is what a condescending.... 

If you put a video on the forum for everyone to see, people are going to weigh in on it. Do not take it so personally when they give you their honest opinion, unsolicited or not.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

Absolutely amazing to witness Fred's stubborn intransigence in the face of all advice to the contrary when there is absolutely NO BENEFIT to having the dog switch bumpers and a great deal of potential (virtually guaranteed) problems from teaching your dog to drop a bumper/duck in order to pick up another one. THIS IS NEVER OK. It must be awesome to know so much that you can summarily disregard all advice given by others.

Since Fred is a self professed dog training genius and has already refused this advice from better trainers than myself on this very thread, I just want to direct this to anyone who viewed the video and wants to try training in this manner:

This is a variation on walking singles. You can do it as Fred is with the dog returning to the point of beginning or leaving the dog at the last point of delivery and walking to make the next throw. You can work your way around a huge area with just one bumper and your dog in this manner and incorporate any number of factors in a single session. I prefer leaving dog at point of last delivery because it gives the dog a moment to catch his breath while I walk 100-150 yards to throw the next mark, but either way is OK and some situations are likely more suited to the dog returning to his "place" before each mark. The mechanics of what Fred is doing are OK except that it is NEVER a good idea to have the dog drop one retrieving object for the sole purpose of picking up another one.

Lest anyone bring up the possibility of a dog needing to drop a dead duck to pick up a cripple, there are simply better ways to go about making that happen that by training this way. First, direct your dog to pick up the cripple in the first place. This is poison bird training and is needed in "advanced" hunt tests anyway. If by some chance your dog was retrieving a dead duck (already in mouth) and you saw another that you thought was dead begin to swim away you could either let the dog finish returning to you and then send for the cripple or sit the dog immediately, tell him to drop (remote drop must have been taught) and then handle to the cripple. Most likely if the dog was already returning with the bird in its mouth I would probably allow it to deliver the bird before sending for the cripple in this somewhat rare scenario. Switching is reputed to be a very hard habit to break (never had a dog who was allowed to switch, so I don't know) so it would be best to avoid anything that would tend to create the habit and this is what this method does. It seems that this would also cause a dog (as another poster suggested) to begin the habit of "shopping the pile," which isn't as hazardous as "switching" in a real hunting or hunt test scenario, but is certainly an annoying, time-wasting habit in training with pile work (I do have experience "shopping" unfortunately).

Fred, do you know what a "Phase 2" trainer is?


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

moscowitz said:


> Hey Fred you need a subscription to Online Retriever and a seminar to either Lardy, Evans or Rorem.
> 
> And then you will realize how little we all including you really know when it come to training dogs.


It is entirely possible that Fred already has a subscription to Retrievers ONLINE and has my Training Retrievers Alone DVD and book wherein I show Stand Alones, Send Backs and Walk Back marks. Just sayin'.

Fred clearly has his own agenda and approach. I simply look at his stuff and then decide if there is anything I want to adopt. However, as pointed out some beginnners might adopt things that most of us would not. I wish I knew a way to keep such beginners out of trouble but I don't. I see enough bad advice on the Internet to think it is all right for experienced trainers to wave a red flag when they see something they don't like. 

At least it should be OK to wave a yellow flag that says "Caution! Beware! Danger Ahead! Slow Down!

Anybody got an emoticon for a yellow flag for me?


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

moscowitz said:


> Hey Fred you need a ... seminar to either Lardy, Evans or Roreim.
> 
> And then you will realize how little we all including you really know when it come to training dogs.


I suspect that Fred would wind up arguing with Lardy, Evans or Rorem and contending that his methods are superior. His immense arrogant stubbornness truly amazing. When have you ever seen Fred concede a point or admit that someone else may have an idea from which he could learn?


----------



## BHB (Apr 28, 2008)

Do you come on here to teach or to learn or to brag? So, why do you have to throw your own marks? 

BHB


----------



## Stephen Whitley (Feb 3, 2007)

BHB said:


> Do you come on here to teach or to learn or to brag? So, why do you have to throw your own marks?
> 
> BHB


The answer to question #2 is pretty easy one to figure out!


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

fredhassen said:


> As I said, I feel it's good to do both and you don't. I still will continue to run the dog with a bumper in his mouth, and I am not trying to change anyone. I clearly said 'This is how I do it' and did not say 'this is what all of you should be doing'. Take care.


OK Fred,

I punched out a while ago of participating in these threads. I had felt that they all seem to wind up going in the same direction. It had been a while, and I decided to, as non-argumentatively and respectfully as I thought I could, attempt to have some reasonable exchange.

I feel that this one has gone similar to those in the past.

You asked me a question and I tried to answer it. 

I did not try to tell you what you should be doing.

Please come to me directly if you want my input on training discussions. I will be as candid as I can. 

I am going to try to get folks to handle your posted videos as they've done recently. The less response, seems to be the better. Hopefully we won't fall into the same old spot of fanning the flames.

I wish you the best of luck with your retriever training. You know where to find me and you've got my number.

I'm out....


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

LOL, I left a comment on Fred's video saying that I didn't think it was a good idea to have the dog switch bumpers. I was doing it as a public service so he wouldn't delude any poor saps who might buy into that portion of his "technique." He deleted the comment and blocked me from further comments. NICE.


----------



## BHB (Apr 28, 2008)

Do you come on here to teach or to learn or to brag? So, why do you have to throw your own marks? 



Stephen Whitley said:


> The answer to question #2 is pretty easy one to figure out!


My point exactly!

BHB


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

HuntinDawg said:


> LOL, I left a comment on Fred's video saying that I didn't think it was a good idea to have the dog switch bumpers. I was doing it as a public service so he wouldn't delude any poor saps who might buy into that portion of his "technique." He deleted the comment and blocked me from further comments. NICE.


He blocks anyone that disagrees with him on his videos. He blocks people on here also. He only wants attention. I would suggest doing what Chris says and ignore him. He won't read this unless someone quotes me because I am blocked.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Step away from the keyboard....step away....


----------



## sbal (Jan 16, 2009)

Good grief!!!!!


----------



## Jon Couch (Jan 2, 2008)

I keep thinking of the Farmer/Aycock video where Danny talkes about three levels of trainers. I believe that Fred may be stuck in level 2. Just sayin

Jon


----------



## Todd Caswell (Jun 24, 2008)

I was the first one to post on this and I'm glad no one else seen any benifit in having the dog run around with a bumper in his mouth on the way to a mark. I'll bet if Fred acually followed a proven method instead of trying to reinvent the wheel all the time, he might do all right.

I"m out.....


----------



## M&K's Retrievers (May 31, 2009)

Well I guess I'll have to let his video load so I can see what all the hub bub is about. I'll let the dogs air while it loads.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

ErinsEdge said:


> He blocks anyone that disagrees with him on his videos. He blocks people on here also. He only wants attention. I would suggest doing what Chris says and ignore him. He won't read this unless someone quotes me because I am blocked.


I've had him on ignore for quite some time. It seemed like everyone was doing a good job of not responding to his posts and then I saw that this one had 2-3 pages of replies and I looked at it....hopefully I won't make the same mistake next time. The funny thing is everyone was trying to play nice and make CONSTRUCTIVE comments, but he simply won't listen because he knows it all (Stage 2 all the way).


----------



## M&K's Retrievers (May 31, 2009)

Oh my. ...........


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Dennis if you read this just wanted to thank you for your efforts in publishing online retriever. Also, I really enjoy when you and Ted have your discussions. They really get me thinking. Always look forward to getting it in the mail. Thanks again.


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

After the video finally loaded, I was very surprised that someone would take the time to build IN a "switch" when most of us work so hard to prevent them.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

One must shuck a lot of Oysters to find a pearl....That said, it seems that intolerance is alive and well on the RTF

just sayin'

john


----------



## agengo02 (Nov 3, 2009)

john fallon said:


> One must shuck a lot of Oysters to find a pearl....That said, it seems that intolerance is alive and well on the RTF
> 
> just sayin'
> 
> john


My thoughts exactly. I re-read all of his comments and NO WHERE is he asking for constructive criticism or what any of yall even think about his methods. He simply stated that this is how HE does it. 

I think it's a bad move as a forum to push away a guy that has a different approach. He obviously has control over his dogs. If it works for him, then what's everybody's problem?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

agengo02 said:


> My thoughts exactly. I re-read all of his comments and NO WHERE is he asking for constructive criticism or what any of yall even think about his methods. He simply stated that this is how HE does it.
> 
> I think it's a bad move as a forum to push away a guy that has a different approach. He obviously has control over his dogs. If it works for him, then what's everybody's problem?


You and John Fallon are exactly why RTF is here for the users.

If you guys are getting value out of it, that's good for you.

If you read through the exchanges I've had with Fred in this thread, and find that I've been offbase, then I'll gladly take constructive criticism and find a way to better "manage" RTF.

I make mistakes every day. Just ask my wife, my dog, or my kids.

I personally, will not be engaging in dialogue to fan the flames. 

If you do some searches, you will find a very repeatable pattern that does not seem to bring much overall value.

Chris


----------



## agengo02 (Nov 3, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> You and John Fallon are exactly why RTF is here for the users.
> 
> If you guys are getting value out of it, that's good for you.
> 
> ...


I definitely understand that an amateur should probably use different techniques when starting off and the good members are worried about someone messing up their dog by this, but it comes off as attacking and a "that's not the right way to do it" mentality.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Rainmaker said:


> Fred can train his dogs however he wants, no problemo, but newbies especially need to be aware that teaching a dog to switch bumpers on marks flies in the face of most retriever training. It is promoting a switch, which will get you dropped pronto in AKC. Most people train so their dog doesn't even shop a pile during yardwork, let alone carry a bumper to a mark, drop it and pick up the found one. Just a heads up for some, I'm not debating with Fred, he has his own agenda, but switching bumpers on marks is particularly questionable for someone new to retriever training to consider as standard procedure.



DITTO DON'T WATCH THIS METHOD!!


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

A "legend in his own mind" comes to mind.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

agengo02 said:


> I definitely understand that an amateur should probably use different techniques when starting off and the good members are worried about someone messing up their dog by this, but it comes off as attacking and a "that's not the right way to do it" mentality.


Just to be clear...do you think that the way I worded my posts was "attacking"? I tried pretty hard to be respectful, considerate, and clear that I'm not saying "my way is the only way".

Or maybe you are writing that the overall composite impact of so many folks responding to the notion of teaching the dog to run to the mark, spit a bumper, then pick up another bumper is "attacking"?

Your opinions are valid and good here...just looking to clarify.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

BHB writes: I'm thinking of that diversion bird in a HT that is shot out in front or to the side and sometimes over the dog as he returns with a previous mark. If the dog switches ducks he's out of the test. Switching bumpers like this would be the last thing I would teach a dog. Even for a hunting scenario I wouldn't want him to switch. I usually want him to go past a diversion bird dead in the decoys for that wounded bird 50yds+ away.
JMHO. 

Hi 'BHB'! Hopefully this video clears up some concerns of yours. This is the same dog that is in the other video. I will show more of this with my puppy and my other dog, but I gotta run. Take care. I guess for the sake of this type of training, it is some sort of 'poison bird' drill. Would be more than happy to show it to you in any sort of set up that you would like to see. Just post it, and I will have the video within 24 hours. Thanks.

http://gallery.me.com/fredhassen/100580


----------



## Furball (Feb 23, 2006)

Fred I bet if you do this with just one bumper (send dog to pylon while you keep the bumper so you can throw it again) that the dog will run a lot harder and have more enjoyment out of your marks. Do you do this (bumper in mouth marks) in large fields with change of cover and terrain? Just doing this drill on mowed grass is I think more exercising the dog than training him to do anything productive.
Disciplined casting (casting w/ bumper in mouth) is not that hard to teach a dog and really the only point of it besides an obedience/control drill is preparing the dog to handle during swim by.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Just to be clear...do you think that the way I worded my posts was "attacking"? I tried pretty hard to be respectful, considerate, and clear that I'm not saying "my way is the only way".
> 
> Or maybe you are writing that the overall composite impact of so many folks responding to the notion of teaching the dog to run to the mark, spit a bumper, then pick up another bumper is "attacking"?
> 
> Your opinions are valid and good here...just looking to clarify.


Everyone perceives things differently, but I thought you were very respectful and bending over backwards to keep your comments civil. Fred's posts put a lot of us who have trained dogs at a high level, yet want to keep an open, non-preachy mind, in a hard spot. That being to post a negative, or critical comment when we see things that not only go against the grain of how were were trained to train a dog, but actually seem to be counter productive in our way of thinking. I thought you did a fine job walking that fine line of sounding an alarm for the newby without attacking Fred.

As for me I have avoided posting on these threads, but since I'm here, I understand that Fred comes from a different dog training dicipline where he may or may not be considered the "Mike Lardy" of that area, but I take his post as presumptious as regards retriever hunt test or field trial training. 

Chris I sually just ignore these threads but I wanted to let you know that you came across as ultra-respectful.

John


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

fredhassen said:


> BHB writes: I'm thinking of that diversion bird in a HT that is shot out in front or to the side and sometimes over the dog as he returns with a previous mark. If the dog switches ducks he's out of the test. Switching bumpers like this would be the last thing I would teach a dog. Even for a hunting scenario I wouldn't want him to switch. I usually want him to go past a diversion bird dead in the decoys for that wounded bird 50yds+ away.
> JMHO.
> 
> Hi 'BHB'! Hopefully this video clears up some concerns of yours. This is the same dog that is in the other video. I will show more of this with my puppy and my other dog, but I gotta run. Take care. I guess for the sake of this type of training, it is some sort of 'poison bird' drill. Would be more than happy to show it to you in any sort of set up that you would like to see. Just post it, and I will have the video within 24 hours. Thanks.
> ...


Fred, what is your goal with this dog? 

I see things in your training that I think will lead to blinking, switching and unsteadiness, when he gets the pressure and distractions of real birds, more people, more dogs, and more excitement.

He's not going to be just a high level retriever, you have other plans for him right?


----------



## lizard55033 (Mar 10, 2008)

I see teach your dog to switch as a very good thing. Not in a HT/FT situation, but in a hunting situation.

Say you shoot 2 or 3 birds that come in and they hit the water like they're dead. You send the dog and oops one popped up as a cripple. Now the dog can drop the dead bird and cast to the cripple....

Just my take.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Furball said:


> Fred I bet if you do this with just one bumper (send dog to pylon while you keep the bumper so you can throw it again) that the dog will run a lot harder and have more enjoyment out of your marks. Do you do this (bumper in mouth marks) in large fields with change of cover and terrain? Just doing this drill on mowed grass is I think more exercising the dog than training him to do anything productive.
> Disciplined casting (casting w/ bumper in mouth) is not that hard to teach a dog and really the only point of it besides an obedience/control drill is preparing the dog to handle during swim by.


Yes, he's much faster without the bumpers, he is just learning the bumper exchange and to run with them. None of my dogs maintain their speed for a few weeks til they get comfortable running with a bumper. I will do a video later today of him running something without the bumpers. My end goal is speed with bumpers in mouth, but it does take a bit for them to get used to it. He is my wife's dog and I am just taking him over to run tests with him starting about a week ago. I just got another 7 month old puppy that I will also be running in tests. More about how I acquired him later. Yes though.......stylish dogs are what it's all about. I put these videos out purposely, so that you will recall what you wrote when you see him in another week or so, or watch him now without a bumper. I don't want to mislead anyone into thinking that dogs just maintain all their speed when they first start running with a bumper in their mouth.


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

lizard55033 said:


> I see teach your dog to switch as a very good thing. Not in a HT/FT situation, but in a hunting situation.
> 
> Say you shoot 2 or 3 birds that come in and they hit the water like they're dead. You send the dog and oops one popped up as a cripple. Now the dog can drop the dead bird and cast to the cripple....
> 
> Just my take.


So, what if he decides to then drop the cripple, and switch back to a dead bird....


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

Fred, I think your dogs are very well trained, can't say much about if its for HT/FT, since I am no expert. I was making a joke on another thread that your second video will teach a dog to walk over that inline bird and always go long!  That was only a joke and I actually find your threads especially when the participants are sparing a bit (at least to a degree) sporting to say the least.

As a new trainer I do agree with the comments made by those that are concerned over new folks trying to do these things, cause I am sure if I tried I would create a shopping, switching issue! So I stick with the program I know and have seen work and what the people I train with understand. I'll go into hiding now, going home tonight to see if I can make another video that that makes folks dizzy! 

Your dogs are well trained, very obediant, etc.. Folks like Chris, Howard, Evan have trained or have trained people who have trained titled dogs, so they've earned my respect for sure! So its hard to post up a comment which appears to be splitting hairs, but I've always been good at that! Take care and always have fun!


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

GulfCoast said:


> So, what if he decides to then drop the cripple, and switch back to a dead bird....


You weren't expecting me to think that you were even capable of possibly admitting that you were wrong about anything did you?


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

I freely admit when I am wrong, if I am wrong. Having seen more dogs than I care to think about switch in hunt tests and in the fabled "real hunting," I have no basis upon which to think I am incorrect. ;-) Hello: Pot? Yes, Kettle?


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Byron Musick said:


> As a new trainer I do agree with the comments made by those that are concerned over new folks trying to do these things, cause I am sure if I tried I would create a shopping, switching issue! So I stick with the program I know and have seen work and what the people I train with understand. I'll go into hiding now, going home tonight to see if I can make another video that that makes folks dizzy!


I never really gave it much thought about a newbie doing this. I personally do not think that all the pieces of the bumper exchange, and the problems and fixes involved in getting the dog to do that, and having the dog be capable of dropping and picking things up both remotely, and getting him to not pick up the same object he dropped etc, etc, etc, that it could even be done by anyone with a 'correction based' collar system. I don't personally think it's even possible, and they would have to have a hell of a lot of collar knowledge on both ends to accomplish it. Yes, I realize that people are acting like they could do it in their sleep, but they just don't have a use for it.......I know what goes into it. A newbie CERTAINLY couldn't do it, and until I actually see a correction based collar system accomplish it......I will stick to my guns on this so it's all a moot point. Obviously, a leash trainer ain't gonna be doing it cause there is too much involved during the action while the dog is away from you and doing the process. They are pooh poohing it, but they really have no idea on what goes into that. You better have an incredible remote retrieve with a collar to do it, and distinguish dropping and picking up something to the dog. I will stop right there, because the more I think of it, the crazier it is. No, that thought never crossed my mind cause they would give up after beating their heads against the wall. Give it a try with one of your dogs that is not a field dog (so you don't ruin him :-0 ) and I'll give you a year to work on that. I'll check back with you then, and you can tell me your opinion on your fear that a newbie is gonna just stroll right in and do that. Yes, I would not recommend you moving from what you already have, cause you wouldn't have the knowledge to accomplish it. All agreed on that point.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

lizard55033 said:


> I see teach your dog to switch as a very good thing. Not in a HT/FT situation, but in a hunting situation.
> 
> Say you shoot 2 or 3 birds that come in and they hit the water like they're dead. You send the dog and oops one popped up as a cripple. Now the dog can drop the dead bird and cast to the cripple....
> 
> Just my take.


It would only take a remote 'drop' sort of command for anyone to be able to do that. All of my dogs do that. They wouldn't just drop it without adding the command though......no one would want a dog to do that. Teach your dog a remote 'drop' command and you will have it.


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

GulfCoast said:


> I freely admit when I am wrong, if I am wrong. Having seen more dogs than I care to think about switch in hunt tests and in the fabled "real hunting," I have no basis upon which to think I am incorrect. ;-) Hello: Pot? Yes, Kettle?


Yes, and I'll bet that 100% of them that you saw do that were trained in a system much more similar to yours than similar to mine. They didn't do it because of excessive bumper exchanges that's for sure.  Kettle black?


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

fredhassen said:


> Yes, I would not recommend you moving from what you already have, cause you wouldn't have the knowledge to accomplish it. All agreed on that point.


Glad you told me that, I was wondering if.. never mind....


----------



## Furball (Feb 23, 2006)

fredhassen said:


> I never really gave it much thought about a newbie doing this. I personally do not think that all the pieces of the bumper exchange, and the problems and fixes involved in getting the dog to do that, and having the dog be capable of dropping and picking things up both remotely, and getting him to not pick up the same object he dropped etc, etc, etc, that it could even be done by anyone with a 'correction based' collar system. I don't personally think it's even possible, and they would have to have a hell of a lot of collar knowledge on both ends to accomplish it. ...


Fred, we aren't debating whether some people could or could not train their dogs to do as you have trained yours (swapping bumpers and/or remote drop). What we're debating is the necessity of training it in the first place. To me, your swapping bumpers, remote drops, not dropping, etc etc is completely a parlor trick in the context of training retrievers for hunting or competition. There is no time when the dog is going to be required to swap bumpers or birds on command, to be handled to a bird while carrying something, or any other thing that may prove your methods useful, in hunting or testing retrievers. Now that is an accomplishment in training itself, just not in our little world, which you have chosen to step into by virtue of participating on this website. 
From my meager experience I don't know if the two-bumper remote retrieve thing you've got going on here is definitely going to encourage or inadvertently teach switching on a diversion, but I do think it's a clunky and needless activity to have the dog carry a bumper to the mark, and is probably taking you a lot more effort to train it than the payoff of what it is teaching the dog in the long run. It's hard enough to find the time to train the absolutely essential elements of a handling retriever, I wouldn't waste my time on something that had no beneficial impact.


----------



## agengo02 (Nov 3, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Just to be clear...do you think that the way I worded my posts was "attacking"? I tried pretty hard to be respectful, considerate, and clear that I'm not saying "my way is the only way".
> 
> Or maybe you are writing that the overall composite impact of so many folks responding to the notion of teaching the dog to run to the mark, spit a bumper, then pick up another bumper is "attacking"?
> 
> Your opinions are valid and good here...just looking to clarify.


No I thought you had well thought out and respectful answers. I was just referring to some of the more personal bashings that were handed out.


----------



## Stephen Whitley (Feb 3, 2007)

Furball said:


> Fred, we aren't debating whether some people could or could not train their dogs to do as you have trained yours (swapping bumpers and/or remote drop). What we're debating is the necessity of training it in the first place. To me, your swapping bumpers, remote drops, not dropping, etc etc is completely a parlor trick in the context of training retrievers for hunting or competition. There is no time when the dog is going to be required to swap bumpers or birds on command, to be handled to a bird while carrying something, or any other thing that may prove your methods useful, in hunting or testing retrievers. Now that is an accomplishment in training itself, just not in our little world, which you have chosen to step into by virtue of participating on this website.
> From my meager experience I don't know if the two-bumper remote retrieve thing you've got going on here is definitely going to encourage or inadvertently teach switching on a diversion, but I do think it's a clunky and needless activity to have the dog carry a bumper to the mark, and is probably taking you a lot more effort to train it than the payoff of what it is teaching the dog in the long run. It's hard enough to find the time to train the absolutely essential elements of a handling retriever, I wouldn't waste my time on something that had no beneficial impact.



What he said...


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Furball said:


> Fred, we aren't debating whether some people could or could not train their dogs to do as you have trained yours (swapping bumpers and/or remote drop). What we're debating is the necessity of training it in the first place. To me, your swapping bumpers, remote drops, not dropping, etc etc is completely a parlor trick in the context of training retrievers for hunting or competition. There is no time when the dog is going to be required to swap bumpers or birds on command, to be handled to a bird while carrying something, or any other thing that may prove your methods useful, in hunting or testing retrievers. Now that is an accomplishment in training itself, just not in our little world, which you have chosen to step into by virtue of participating on this website.
> From my meager experience I don't know if the two-bumper remote retrieve thing you've got going on here is definitely going to encourage or inadvertently teach switching on a diversion, but I do think it's a clunky and needless activity to have the dog carry a bumper to the mark, and is probably taking you a lot more effort to train it than the payoff of what it is teaching the dog in the long run. It's hard enough to find the time to train the absolutely essential elements of a handling retriever, I wouldn't waste my time on something that had no beneficial impact.


Bottom line: All true.....very soon one of us is going to say 'I told you so'.


----------



## Furball (Feb 23, 2006)

fredhassen said:


> Bottom line: All true.....very soon one of us is going to say 'I told you so'.


"I told you so" for what? Between you and I specifically? No I really don't think so.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Fred
There are a lot of ways to train for and do stand alone Marks, but the requirements of Hunting, HT,and FT's , limit the number of variations that would interest those who frequent this Board . 
Training abstract concepts, while interesting to a few of us for the difficulty of the endeavor itself, will generally meet with a lukewarm response.
That is to be expected, but I think you knew that.

john


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

fredhassen said:


> Bottom line: All true.....very soon one of us is going to say 'I told you so'.


The big question here is: If that person saying "I told you so" isn't you, are you going to even confess to the error and admit it?


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Furball said:


> "I told you so" for what? Between you and I specifically? No I really don't think so.


If everything I am doing as most people claim is useless and meaningless, and will only lead to negative things, and things that will get me dropped, then I obviously won't pass the tests.

That is unless you are trying to say that any schmo can walk in....do everything wrong, create all bad habits and still pass.

I'm saying there is more than one way to train and pass, and the test is the benchmark. I mean if you are measuring someone's credibility by the tests they have passed, then it's certainly unfair to not give the credit if they pass them. 

Translation: it all obviously has some merit if I pass, and it doesn't if I don't. The actual test is the benchmark, that is unless you are trying to say how good someone writes on RTF is the benchmark? I don't think you are trying to say that are you?


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2011)

fredhassen said:


> Translation: it all obviously has some merit if I pass, and it doesn't if I don't. The actual test is the benchmark, that is unless you are trying to say how good someone writes on RTF is the benchmark? I don't think you are trying to say that are you?


I need a translation of this translation.


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

fredhassen said:


> If everything I am doing as most people claim is useless and meaningless, and will only lead to negative things, and things that will get me dropped, then I obviously won't pass the tests.
> 
> That is unless you are trying to say that any schmo can walk in....do everything wrong, create all bad habits and still pass.
> 
> ...


You've got the easy part out of the way.
Now all you have to do is go pass some tests.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

Fred, I'm replying here on the outside chance that you haven't blocked me and will actually see this post.



fredhassen said:


> If everything I am doing as most people claim is useless and meaningless, and will only lead to negative things, and things that will get me dropped, then I obviously won't pass the tests.
> 
> That is unless you are trying to say that any schmo can walk in....do everything wrong, create all bad habits and still pass.


Any schmo can pass a junior test with a dog with a ton of bad habits...maybe they won't on a given day, but they certainly can. Switching certainly isn't going to show up in a junior test unless he tries to take one off the bird drying rack and shopping the pile is an annoying problem in training, but a non-issue in hunting or hunt tests.



fredhassen said:


> I'm saying there is more than one way to train and pass, and the test is the benchmark.


There are undoubtedly more than one way to train and pass. First you've got Carr based and "Amish." I've done it both ways as have many here. Within those two very broad categories there are many other variances that all work to some degree or another as well as others that fall outside of both (as does yours apparently). I don't doubt that you can train your dog to pass a Junior or even a Senior test given enough time and enough tries. If I were you I'd be sweating bullets if the marks are close together (switch opportunity) and/or when they throw a particularly tempting diversion, but you could still pass (or not) on any given day.




fredhassen said:


> Translation: it all obviously has some merit if I pass, and it doesn't if I don't.


There is a flaw in this logic (fallacy). All good training does not necessarily result in a pass and all poor training does not necessarily result in a failure in a particular test. More to the point though, a pass does not prove that every facet of your (or anyone else's) training is effective. I'll give you an example: I taught my old dog how to use a gumball machine to give himself treats. That same dog was a HR, SH, and UH. Using your logic, this proves that training him to operate the gumball machine had some merit in passing Seasoned, Senior or Upland tests, which it clearly did NOT. My current dog (MH, HRCH) has been taught to catch a frisbee. Upon command he leaves his place and charges past me, if I throw the frisbee properly it zooms past him and he then closes on it and catches it in the air. By your logic the fact that he is 5/5 in master tests and has his HRCH indicates that this frisbee training has merit, when it clearly doesn't in this context.

What many of us have tried to say is that we see inherent danger in your methodology in terms of the bumper switch. We fear that it will result in switching and shopping the pile. Switching is a serious fault to be avoided at all costs and a habit to be guarded against. You have clearly decided to disregard our warnings/concerns to your own peril.

Good luck to you and your dogs.


----------



## scott2012 (Feb 16, 2009)

I never thought of teaching my dog to drop a retrieve so that he could go and retriever a cripple that is getting away in a hunting situation. Where we hunt that would really come in handy. I cant see that it is practical in all hunting locations or situations, but it still is an interesting option.


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

fredhassen said:


> I never really gave it much thought about a newbie doing this. I personally do not think that all the pieces of the bumper exchange, and the problems and fixes involved in getting the dog to do that, and having the dog be capable of dropping and picking things up both remotely, and getting him to not pick up the same object he dropped etc, etc, etc, that it could even be done by anyone with a 'correction based' collar system. I don't personally think it's even possible, and they would have to have a hell of a lot of collar knowledge on both ends to accomplish it. Yes, I realize that people are acting like they could do it in their sleep, but they just don't have a use for it.......I know what goes into it. *A newbie CERTAINLY couldn't do it*, and until I actually see a correction based collar system accomplish it......I will stick to my guns on this so it's all a moot point. Obviously, a leash trainer ain't gonna be doing it cause there is too much involved during the action while the dog is away from you and doing the process. They are pooh poohing it, but they really have no idea on what goes into that. You better have an incredible remote retrieve with a collar to do it, and distinguish dropping and picking up something to the dog. I will stop right there, because the more I think of it, the crazier it is. No, that thought never crossed my mind cause they would give up after beating their heads against the wall. Give it a try with one of your dogs that is not a field dog (so you don't ruin him :-0 ) and I'll give you a year to work on that. I'll check back with you then, and you can tell me your opinion on your fear that* a newbie is gonna just stroll right in and do that*. Yes, I would not recommend you moving from what you already have, cause you wouldn't have the knowledge to accomplish it. All agreed on that point.


I can't help it. I have to take the bait. You are incredibly arrogant. How many hunt tests have you passed? How about disseminate some of this genius after you have passed a senior test? I don't care how many yorkies you have collar conditioned, you are a NEWBIE to field work. Your drills and methods aren't innovative or creative. They are a means without the end in mind. A wise man once said that if you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

Charles C. said:


> How many hunt tests have you passed? How about disseminate some of this genius after you have passed a senior test?


I believe he passed at least one Senior test with his previous dog Charger, now deceased. Maybe Charger didn't have this advanced switch training...

I'm sorry, dear Lord, please forgive me and be with the pygmies...


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

This dog passed one senior and failed 3.


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

HuntinDawg said:


> I believe he passed at least one Senior test with his previous dog Charger, now deceased. Maybe Charger didn't have this advanced switch training...
> 
> I'm sorry, dear Lord, please forgive me and be with the pygmies...


I'm being generous with the senior requirement. You can be a poor trainer and pass lots of senior tests. How about we unleash the genius after you pass a master or jam a qualifying?


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

Charles C. said:


> I'm being generous with the senior requirement. You can be a poor trainer and pass lots of senior tests.


I know. I'm proof of that.


----------



## CLindsay (Jan 5, 2010)

Fred 
I also will take the bait. I want you to give us a breakdown of test run versus test passed with any dog you have run in a hunt test. 

I will start with mine. 
HRCH Paige 4 for 4 Started 3 for 6 Seasoned 5 for 8 Finished

HRCH Libby 4 for 4 Seasoned 13 for 14 Finished 0 for 1 Grand

Dex 2 for 2 Started Soon to be 4 for 4 and by the way this is my two legged retriever that has been in the hospital more than at home.

My point here is that any dog worth merit should be able to pass a junior or a started level test.

I have not run AKC as only one of my dogs is AKC registered but I have been to some of their test as Libby will get her Master title. I just did not see the sense of running Junior or Senior.

Most of your videos of latehave been completely discarded as quickly as they come up. This one in particular struck a chord and individuals wanted to make sure newbies did not train a bad habit.

Now go load up your Hummer and get ready for Vegas HRC.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

This thread reminds me of when some one asks a question and they only want to hear what they want to hear....you can give them a perfectly solid answer to the question, but if you don't say what they want you to say they will argue with you until the cows come home....if you don't drink the kool-aid I'd recommend not bothering with replying.

I would have a better chance of having a training conversation with my mother-in-law who knows nothing of training dogs other than Flash has to eat his kibble before he gets any treats and of course he must sit.

FOM


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2011)

Just remember, voting is an American privilege. Don't be afraid to take advantage of it! Even if it is related to an island (of sorts). 

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=63521


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I make mistakes every day. Just ask my wife, my dog,
> 
> Chris


Bus had a lot too say but the wife just rolled her eyes


/paul


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

IMITATE SUCCESS of those you see are the best at the game YOU play.When I see Lardy,Farmer,Rorem et al break out the hula hoops and parlor tricks....I'm down with it.


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

Oh crap, he made me do it, I will be posting stupid parlor tricks video taught by a pure amature this evening, I thought about dumping a pile of bumpers on my dogs head, but just could not see the reason for it, that and switching bumpers, casting yes, switching no.... Actually, dumping anything on my dogs head just does not seem right... See you in a bit..


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> Just remember, voting is an American privilege. Don't be afraid to take advantage of it! Even if it is related to an island (of sorts).
> 
> http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=63521



When we think about American privileges lets not limit it to voting ..................

john


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

I just had to check, could not believe this thread was back up on top again. I gotta quit this rubber necking. Kind of reminds me of my little accident today, when I slid my truck into the garbage can at the end of the drive way and spent an hour picking up trash. Stick with the labs DERF, a golden would look at you and piss on your leg. Labs are way more forgiving of goofy owners.


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

Here is my pup doing about the same crap, only I do not allow switching, also I did not have to buy a franchise! Understand she is very young and not ready for a pile of bumpers dumped on her head yet, although I think that goes beyond anything I actually want to do!

One day maybe I can possess the infinate wisdom of the master, in the meantime I'll stick to watching my Evan Graham & Lardy video's and reading my Amy D Books, and hope one day to achieve GREATNESS like a SMS PRO has!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNbkUUAhyl8



fredhassen said:


> I never really gave it much thought about a newbie doing this. Yes, I would not recommend you moving from what you already have, cause you wouldn't have the knowledge to accomplish it. All agreed on that point.



I got to love the last statement you made to me...


----------



## Guest (Feb 5, 2011)

john fallon said:


> When we think about American privileges lets not limit it to voting ..................
> 
> john


OMG, you are so right! Finally we agree on something. 

We are welcome to post anything on the Internet that demonstrates that we clearly [deleted this part]. Not pointing fingers at anyone, just saying that is our right.

God bless America!


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

Byron Musick said:


> Understand she is very young and not ready for a pile of bumpers dumped on her head yet


Literally laughed out loud when I read that. Thanks for that mental image.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Melanie Foster said:


> I need a translation of this translation.


In your language that would read "proof's in the puddin baby, put up or shut up"


----------



## Guest (Feb 5, 2011)

DarrinGreene said:


> In your language that would read "proof's in the puddin baby, put up or shut up"


I was just kinda hoping for the shut up part.


----------



## Diane Brunelle (Jun 11, 2004)




----------



## Kevin Eskam (Mar 2, 2007)

Wasnt there a thread like this about 4 months ago? Then about 3 to 4 months before that ? Then about 3 to 4 months before that? Then ..........................

I like the Seat on a duck ones better!!


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Charles C. said:


> I'm being generous with the senior requirement. You can be a poor trainer and pass lots of senior tests. How about we unleash the genius after you pass a master or jam a qualifying?


Hi Charles. I have only taken 2 Senior tests in my life. I failed the first and passed the 2nd. I passed all of my Jr. tests. I really have only asked for one thing, and no one seems willing to give it to me.

Yes, I am new to this, and I realize that I probably really suck big time next to all of you. I've said that a million times. I have videos of all 5 of the only tests I have ever taken. As I said, I've taken 5 in my life, and you have probably done hundreds. I'm not much for learning from a bunch of writing, so I have asked kindly to see other people's tests. 

I'm agreeing with you and everyone else..........I totally suck and am new, and you guys are great, awesome the whole nine yards. I mean that is certainly what I would expect if you have been to hundreds of tests and I have been to 5. I just want to 'see' that's all. I'm expecting EXACTLY what you are saying. I would be awfully disappointed if your dog didn't look a million times better than mine on your tests. I'd like to see the most recent ones of course. I mean I can't imagine with all the bashing being done, that your dogs years later, and with probably hundreds of tests under your belt, that your dog would look any less than a million times better.......especially when you pair that with all the comments about how bad I suck. 

How can I possibly get better without comparison? I'm figuring this out on my own, and I would certainly expect that I would be a lot better when I have hundreds of tests under me as well. Everyone has to start somewhere.
I'm braced and ready for the total massacre that you are about to present to me, and yes..........I do realize that like you, I will probably fall over the back of my chair from laughing so hard at how much I do suck, when I see your most recent tests, next to a sorry ass like myself. I'd be extremely disappointed if I saw anything less. 

I mean it would be like watching Barry Bonds take batting practice against someone that was cut by his elementary school team. No problem, I can deal with it. I'm 4 for 5, and I'm sure you were probably 5 for 5. Heck, you guys all said I wouldn't even be able to walk on the field.

I guess if you don't want to, I'll have to wait til I see you out there, and I will watch very closely and say to myself "This is a guy that's been giving me lots of grief, so I better watch closely because I'm sure that he's about to make me look just plain silly". I'll watch if you send me the video, and if not, I'll be sure to watch when I run into you. Thanks.


----------



## scott2012 (Feb 16, 2009)

fredhassen said:


> Hi Charles. I have only taken 2 Senior tests in my life. I failed the first and passed the 2nd. I passed all of my Jr. tests. I really have only asked for one thing, and no one seems willing to give it to me.
> 
> Yes, I am new to this, and I realize that I probably really suck big time next to all of you. I've said that a million times. I have videos of all 5 of the only tests I have ever taken. As I said, I've taken 5 in my life, and you have probably done hundreds. I'm not much for learning from a bunch of writing, so I have asked kindly to see other people's tests.
> 
> ...


Fred,

I, for one.....like your videos and I hope that you do not get discouraged by a lot of the folks on here. As I posted earlier, I had never thought of teaching my dog to drop a retrieve on the return during hunting in order for me to be able to send him for a cripple that might get away. But now that I see your video and the idea, ...hey it would work really well for me in places that I hunt. 

As for the hunt test game........it is just that....it is a game. And the dog learns the game pretty quickly and through exposure...i.e. training... learns that switching is not wanted here. Because of the time and effort it takes to get the dog to do what you are training for.....I think a smart dog picks up pretty quickly what is allowed in the field and what is allowed at a hunt test. I dont see it as being such a big, scary deal like so many others have said.....and your dogs appear to really enjoy their training.....this is what I want for my dogs for sure....so keep at it. You and your dogs can work through any bumps in the road that come up.


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

Fred, did you watch those videos that Gooser posted of a training setup Cherylon Loveland's group did last weekend. They basically show several dogs doing the same setup. It's not a real easy set up but the dogs did it. Some differently than I would have attempted it but still, they did it.

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65795

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65797


----------



## fredhassen (Dec 4, 2009)

Howard N said:


> Fred, did you watch those videos that Gooser posted of a training setup Cherylon Loveland's group did last weekend. They basically show several dogs doing the same setup. It's not a real easy set up but the dogs did it. Some differently than I would have attempted it but still, they did it.
> 
> http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65795
> 
> http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65797


Yes Howard, you will notice on that thread that I commented by saying: "Thanks for the videos, I enjoyed them".


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

> I'm figuring this out on my own, and I would certainly expect that I would be a lot better when I have hundreds of tests under me as well. Everyone has to start somewhere.


That's the thing, Fred, you don't have to figure it out all on your own. There are lots of incredibly insightful training videos and books on the market from people who have gone through hundreds of dogs. Trial and error is a very inefficient way to learn.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

So...what about a dog bringing back a cripple....and the dog stops, drops the cripple and switches to a dead (diversion) bird? Buh-bye, cripple.
And what if both birds are cripples? (besides better shooting  )
I've never personally seen a hunting dog of any breed that didn't catch on really fast about getting cripples first if there are multiple birds down.


----------



## Pam Spears (Feb 25, 2010)

Fred, empty your inbox. Sent a PM but it bounced, your box is full. Enjoyed meeting you at Copper State last weekend.


----------



## agengo02 (Nov 3, 2009)

I really should stop reading this thread but I just couldn't help it once I saw that it grew to 11 pages. 11 pages of people ripping on Fred, his training methods, his car?, his hunt tests, etc. For 11 pages there have been 3 members that haven't ripped into Fred - 1 doesn't necessarily agree with his methods, 1 can see a specific situation where switching would benefit in a real hunt, and me. 3 different people with different reasons for training and we found a way to NOT rip into him or his methods. What's going on with the rest of you? Can you not just give a compliment and move on or a quick "this method isn't for me, but you have great control of your dogs." ISN'T THIS A FORUM FOR RETRIEVER TRAINERS TO GET TOGETHER AND DISCUSS THEIR METHODS? 

Since venturing into the retriever world I have experienced name calling, personal bashing, denial of acceptance to clubs, etc. It caused me to take a break from here and will probably cause me to take another one. I guess you can't just brag about your dog and/or discuss something other than the status quo. 


Oh and for all of you saying that Fred is arrogant or snooty, read back at your own post and decide who has been the arrogant one on this thread.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Fred, like Elvis, has left the building.

For those looking to contact Fred, please google "sit means sit" and contact him through their contacts link.

Thanks, Chris


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Fred, like Elvis, has left the building.
> 
> For those looking to contact Fred, please google "sit means sit" and contact him through their contacts link.
> 
> Thanks, Chris


No. Thank you!


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Rick_C said:


> No. Thank you!


I think this is kind of a "if you can't say anything nice, don't say it" deal.

Fred's punched out of RTF.

Fred benefitted and profited from all the RTF click-throughs to his videos. Many of those most outspoken were the ones that fanned the flames to grow the posts.... The hit count on this thread alone is evidence of Fred's success.

gotta give the guy credit. 

Fred, if you're lurking...good luck with your dog! Suggestion: step it up and bypass this Senior hunter stuff. Put on a white coat and give it "what fer"!

Chris


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Fred, like Elvis, has left the building.
> 
> For those looking to contact Fred, please google "sit means sit" and contact him through their contacts link.
> 
> Thanks, Chris


I actually trained with Fred and Kevin (kjrice) on Tues...and Fred was very cordial and friendly in our training group, took his turn running his dogs and throwing a fair portion of the marks..It doesnt mean we are going to be sending each other text messages anytime soon,but the personna that he showed on here was not the same as he showed on the training grounds  

He was very inquisitive and watched Al Wilson intently and watched each member do their thing...

I guess it really is all about the dogs


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Bon, don't ya think it is usually that way when we meet people in person? Anger and controversy at what they do here on RTF have very little to do with real personalities. Every single soul I have met that was an RTF'er has been a positive addition. So long Fred,sorry you could not join in the fun part.


----------



## kjrice (May 19, 2003)

2tall said:


> Bon, don't ya think it is usually that way when we meet people in person? Anger and controversy at what they do here on RTF have very little to do with real personalities. Every single soul I have met that was an RTF'er has been a positive addition. So long Fred,sorry you could not join in the fun part.


Time reveals...


----------



## EricW (Aug 6, 2005)

Fred,

I tried to pm you, but it is full. Are you located in NM? PM me or email me [email protected].


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I think this is kind of a "if you can't say anything nice, don't say it" deal.
> 
> Fred's punched out of RTF.
> 
> ...


Which is why all I said was "thank you!".

Had Fred chosen to engage in reasonable discussion and debate about his methods and answered questions rather than essentially telling people they weren't smart enough to understand, he would have been fine here.

Ultimately, as you alluded to, I think his only motivation for being here was to drive people to his website. And if he had to kick the hornets nest time after time to do it, that was ok by him.

They say there's no such thing as bad publicity and Fred certainly personafied that.


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

I just want to say I am poud of the fact that after his very first video and refusal to discuss his methods I never clicked on another video of his or replied to any of his posts after the first couple of threads.. Didn't even open 'em.

What happened to crack leader? :monkey:


----------

