# Pattern Blinds popping



## PDO (Jul 25, 2014)

My pup and I are following Stawski. We spent 3 days teaching a 3 legged PB with blinds from 150-200 yds 90 degrees apart. The last 3 days we have been running the legs from the line. I have used to collar extremely sparingly for OB sit and heel. He clearly knows where the piles are, but progressively over the last 3 days he has begun to pop at 5 to 50 yards after taking a good initial line toward the blind. Today he slowed or started to look back at me on every leg (each leg 2x not directly repeating a leg). On his pops thus far, I have always had my hand up to unspin him in the correct direction and have given him a verbal "BACK" as quickly as I could. After the initial pop he zooms to the blind. I would say he definitely seems unsure about himself. The popping has gotten worse as we have progressed. Immediately after teaching the blinds, he lined them without slowing or popping.

He has been thoroughly forced on back during FTP/TT and has always received a back-nick-back if he popped during TT. 

Should I back up and revist FTP for a day? Or is a force on back appropriate on PB now that we have spent some time teaching? I have been very reluctant to use the collar on the PB field, and havent forced on back yet here. Looking to keep up his positive attitude.

May seem like a naive question, first dog. Want a good attitude going into snow goose season.

PO


----------



## Willie Alderson (Jan 26, 2011)

If you taught him how to be successful in the TT by means of using "back-nick-back", then of course you would force using "back-nick-back" on pattern blinds. It's all still very new to him, but he has the tools to be successful, so use them. Good luck.


----------



## Chris Thiry (Jan 26, 2005)

Last summer I had a dog that was doing the same thing. I would correct with a back-nick-back which kept him going but he continued to look back at me as he ran. What I did to correct it was I stopped running the pattern blinds. I started running ladder blinds. If you are not familiar with ladder blinds it's when you put a number of bumpers on the line starting close and moving the bumpers further apart as you progress. I started with white bumpers then added in orange as he picked up momentum. If he passed by a bumper I would let him go to the next. This drill helped build his confidence. When he did this consistantly without looking back or popping we started short show me blinds and moved them out as his confidence grow. Then to short memory blinds and progressed through that. Continue to use the back-nick-back as your correction if needed. This will take some time. Go slow and be patient don't over do the sessions. When you get success call it a day.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

This may be a point where "shorten up and simplify" might come into play, as it usually does when there seems to be confusion. Consider whether to take a couple days to move up and run them shorter distances while getting the dog to run all the way to the blind. You want the dog to get in the habit of running all the way to the bumper - assuming of course you don't blow the whistle.

One other thing you might consider is not giving him any help when he pops and see what he does. You could just cross your arms across your chest and see if he turns around and goes on out there, and if he does you praise the heck out of him (as he picks the bumper up - you will likely make him stop again if you praise him as he turns, which would seem to be the logical thing to do) and call it a day. You will also then be fairly sure that he knows what to do but he may not have the confidence to do it as you suggest, again invoking "shorten up and simplify".

If you stopped him a lot in TT or if you are stopping him a good bit now for poor initial lines, you might consider what effect that is having as well. Think about why, as you said, he started off by lining them without slowing or popping and he has started this and gotten worse as you have gone along. What could be the cause of that? I would say that it took me longer than three days to teach all three PBs, and I am working with a dog who runs like his hair is on fire. PBs are a pretty big step, and you may have just gotten a little ahead of the dog. Did I mention you might want to "shorten up and simplify"? 

Chris' idea is pretty good too. I am sure you will get a lot better advice from a lot more experienced folks than me on this one. Good luck.


----------



## PDO (Jul 25, 2014)

Thanks all for the advice. T and TT was A LOT of free sends since popping came up early. By the end of TT we had it pretty ironed out.

Could very well be because I moved a bit too fast. First or second day of running all three legs we had a blind or two where he flared off to a different leg and took a few whistles (that were close too, where he has been popping!) and overs to get him to the correct blind. Perhaps should have spent a few more days with just two legs! Otherwise I haven't blown a whistle sit in a few days. His lines have been very good before and after the pop and going to the correct blind. No bugging and looking right out at the correct blind.

I'll spend a session tomorrow running all 3 from the halfway point to each. If he still pops after a day of simplifying, I'll start adding a correction

PO


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Even though the dog has been through and been forced on FTP and TT, be prepared for the dog not understanding the force in the new situation. I like the fact that you did not immediately go to back-nick-back on the first pop. 

But now you've used attrition in dealing with the pop and it has not been effective, so a correction may be warranted. You may consider a session of FTP to refresh that lesson before trying to deal with the pop on the pattern blind field. Either way, it's a good idea to have a plan to get out if you find yourself in a hole. Just a thought.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Glen has given you some good advice here.

You might also think about going back to FTP a day or two, and then sort of starting over on PBs with one leg. If you are going to correct the pop with pressure, which would be appropriate at that point, you will probably want to make the situation as black-and-white for the dog as possible, particularly where you have already had the issue of him flaring off to the wrong blind. Get him really comfortable with the one leg (essentially equating it with FTP in his mind) before you move to add the 2d and so on.

I don't know how experienced you are, but for me the hardest part of it all was judging when a particular stage really was finished. We did a good bit of backing up and reviewing when I got ahead of the dog a little. It happens.



captainjack said:


> Even though the dog has been through and been forced on FTP and TT, be prepared for the dog not understanding the force in the new situation. I like the fact that you did not immediately go to back-nick-back on the first pop.
> 
> But now you've used attrition in dealing with the pop and it has not been effective, so a correction may be warranted. You may consider a session of FTP to refresh that lesson before trying to deal with the pop on the pattern blind field. Either way, it's a good idea to have a plan to get out if you find yourself in a hole. Just a thought.


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

imo, pattern blinds are a necessary part of transition.(i have friends who sort of disagree) but pattern blinds can be run too much, too often(also imo). if you taught these and he ran them well for a day or two, get on with it. move on to other locations for blind drills, bird boy blinds and taught blinds with diversions. get to simple, high success, cold blinds quickly. use pressure judiciously. i assume you have not yet done swimby?


----------



## PDO (Jul 25, 2014)

Correct, too cold for swimby yet. I wouldn't say he ran them well for a day or two. He did run them well when I was teaching them (days 1-3). On day 4 is when the popping started. Day 5 he popped or was thinking about popping on about half of the runs. This morning it was 100%I would say he is now running them well _except_ for the initial momentum break down. If I got him just running through the pop, we would progress to blind drills.

Believe me, I would like to start simple cold blinds and other transition work soon. But with momentum problems going to known, would it be problematic to advance to start the dog going to "semi-known"? I am reluctant to do so given my limited intuition. What is the patch moving forward when the same pop occurs on sight, memory, walk around blinds, etc? More attrition?

All ears,

PO


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Some people think that one of the worst things about the TT, is that it tends to get a dog to pop.
Other people think that one of the best things about the TT, is that it tends to get a dog to pop.

Think about that. And read this thread. http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?71171-Words-of-Wisdom-from-Howard-N


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

PDO said:


> ......He has been thoroughly forced on back during FTP/TT and has always received a back-nick-back if he popped during TT.........


 A dog isn't trained when it gets something right. A dog is trained when it _can't_ get it wrong.

It doesn't matter how easy it is to get him going again with a BACK-nick-BACK after he pops. 
It matters how hard it is to get him to pop. 

You really only need the back-nick-back, to help condition the dog to GO!

The TT makes it really easy for you, to make it really hard for him, to _NOT_ pop. 

You aren't "done", once you can run the TT without the dog popping.
You are done, when you _CAN'T_ get him to pop on the TT. 

No matter how many consecutive sends you stop him on.
No matter how big and bright the white bumpers are that you put on the over piles.
No matter how close you move the over piles to the center line.

Your dog has "told" you what his problem is. So now you need to make sure that it's actually fixed.
Before you move ahead to more advanced training.

Because the more new and advanced stuff that you add, just complicates it even more. It makes the real issue "blurry" to both you and to the dog.

And that means that by advancing, you'll just create new problems.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

copterdoc said:


> Some people think that one of the worst things about the TT, is that it tends to get a dog to pop.
> Other people think that one of the best things about the TT, is that it tends to get a dog to pop.
> 
> Think about that. And read this thread. http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?71171-Words-of-Wisdom-from-Howard-N


By all means, read the thread. But you should remember that you're probably not the retriever trainer that Howard was. Not many on this forum are. His talent allowed him to mitigate, adjust, and do what was necessary to come out of TT with a solid working dog. Not a ruined dog.
Walt


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> A dog isn't trained when it gets something right. A dog is trained when it _can't_ get it wrong.
> 
> It doesn't matter how easy it is to get him going again with a BACK-nick-BACK after he pops.
> It matters how hard it is to get him to pop.
> ...


It sounds like you run the TT to create bugging and popping so that you can fix these things at this stage?

This appears to me to be 180 degrees from Lardy's approach - not sure about Stawski, Carr, or Howard. In TRT you are told to run many freebies so that the dog does not anticipate stopping (so they won't pop). You are told to begin by sending primarily from a front finish (so they won't bug). 

I am of the opinion that running the drills in basics will reveal these issues, but they are not run, at least in Lardy's approach, in order to create them.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

copterdoc said:


> A dog isn't trained when it gets something right. A dog is trained when it _can't_ get it wrong.
> 
> It doesn't matter how easy it is to get him going again with a BACK-nick-BACK after he pops.
> It matters how hard it is to get him to pop.
> ...


I don't agree w/ this statement. Work out issues doing pile work. But don't create issues. JMO


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

Some may disagree but I like to tie white plastic grocery bags on the stakes when I first start PB. it seems to help the dog have more confidence running out seeing that bag blowing around. Then each day I tie another knot or two making it smaller for a bit , before removing completely.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Mike Sale said:


> Some may disagree but I like to tie white plastic grocery bags on the stakes when I first start PB. it seems to help the dog have more confidence running out seeing that bag blowing around. Then each day I tie another knot or two making it smaller for a bit , before removing completely.


I put a white bucket on top of the stake when we first started. Anything to get the dog started running out there when you first get started.


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

pdo,
because of weather and not completing swimby, your yard/force training is not yet complete. *imho*, swimby(and its alternatives) puts way more into the soul of a dog than just water/force and water/handling. i think done well swimby shows up in transition to cold blinds on land, big time. 

you are working a little out of "ideal sequence". this is not uncommon or a problem. because we do not know the personality of your dog and it seems proper, *I* simply feel you need to maintain your judicious attitude about use of aversive pressure, teach and *build confidence*. *again imho*, move to a new field, restart and see what you got.

*your* attitude for this work is very important too. *i feel *a trainer's own frustrations create massive pressure and can create a "locational hot spot" for *some dogs *just like a flair enroute to a pile caused by a nick. if you are a one dog am remember, this dog LOVES you. this dog knows when *you* think *"it sucks".*;-) 

fyi, (i don't think he would mind me sharing this) i was fortunate to be riding around with a couple of "early transition" pups with mr. hugh arthur not too long ago. we came to a field, rode around and picked up buckets that were left from his first teaching session in that field the day before. he placed the white 3 inch bumper piles fifteen or so yards beyond and on line with the "day before bucket locations" and ran three dogs. the pups looked great. then we went to another field and ran a simple cold blind set with three locations. the pups looked great. 

i don't know rick stawski but i venture he would like to hear from you if you are using his work.


----------



## Chris Thiry (Jan 26, 2005)

PDO, how much time did it take you to do each step. Based on your posts it seems that you may be rushing the process and not taking the time to teach the dog each step.


----------



## Jwattsmojo (Jul 15, 2013)

Scoot up to were he is popping and send him on back. Simplify. Simplify


----------



## PDO (Jul 25, 2014)

Too cold and snowy for a couple days to make any new progress.

He is mostly popping with ten yards. If I scoot 10 yards closer or 80 yards closer he still has the pop mostly within a few yards of the line, unless I remark the pile.

I agree that I moved too fast on teaching the legs.

Thanks all for the useful insight. Will report back with updates.

PO


----------



## jonathon27 (Feb 12, 2012)

I'm not certain about your specific situation, but I've seen this close popping develop from dogs getting to many whistles at ten yards or so. Therefore they lack the confidence needed to take a good line without help or reassurance. Here's what I would try; place bumpers in a line (perpendicular to the line the dog will take). Send the dog, as soon as it STARTS to pop back-burn-back. Hopefully, the dog will continue running until it encounters a bumper, don't handle again just let the dog run into a bumper. Praise and repeat, if it is still popping after a couple sends I would heal burn and send again. There are others that will disagree with this advice saying it is to harsh and the dog will not understand, but based on what you said earlier the dog understands that when you say back it has to go get a bumper it didn't see fall and it needs to run until it hears a whistle.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Mary Lynn Metras said:


> I don't agree w/ this statement. Work out issues doing pile work. But don't create issues. JMO


 In that case, you should remove the TT from your program. Skip over it, and move on. 
There are other drills and methods, that will far better fit with your training philosophy.

Because by design, the TT "creates" issues. 
Granted, those are actually issues that already currently exist within the dog that expresses them.

The TT (by design) brings these issues to the surface, and gives you the means to destroy them. 
That's what it's for.

It gives you one final opportunity to "exorcise the demons" that still exist within a dog prior to starting the Transition.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> In that case, you should remove the TT from your program. Skip over it, and move on.
> There are other drills and methods, that will far better fit with your training philosophy.
> 
> Because by design, the TT "creates" issues.
> ...


Lardy runs the TT and goes to great lengths to prevent popping.

How did you come to the conclusion that the TT was designed to "create" issues?

If it was designed to create issues, do you think Lardy uses it to "create" issues?

Edit: The TT teaches casting on a larger scale.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

captainjack said:


> Lardy runs the TT and goes to great lengths to prevent popping.
> 
> How did you come to the conclusion that the TT was designed to "create" issues?
> 
> If it was designed to create issues, do you think Lardy uses it to "create" issues?


 Popping is bad. 
Of course he would go to great lengths to prevent it.

If you are "letting" a dog pop on the TT, you are training the dog to do something "bad".

But the TT does in fact "make" dogs pop. 
So, why do _*YOU*_ run the TT?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> ...
> Because by design, the TT "creates" issues ....





copterdoc said:


> Popping is bad.
> Of course he would go to great lengths to prevent it....


Why would you do something designed to create popping, then go to great length to prevent the dog from popping so that you don't have to correct for it?

You have a way of talking in riddles, so I may be missing your point by taking your words literally. 

And I run the TT to teach my dogs how to take casts on a field like scale (really because Lardy put it in his program between FTP and swim-by).


I'll ask again though, how did you come to the conclusion that the TT was designed to "create" issues? Was this your own revaluation or did you read it or hear it somewhere? Who created the TT anyway ?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

captainjack said:


> .............Edit: The TT teaches casting on a larger scale.


 Bullhocky.
The "casting" that a dog learns from the TT does *NOT* transfer to the field. 
At all.

The dog learns _something_ about casting in the field from the pattern blind field.
But it doesn't _really_ learn about taking a cast, until the dog is running cold blinds.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> Bullshit.
> The "casting" that a dog learns from the TT does *NOT* transfer to the field.
> At all.
> 
> ...


For some reason you are cursing and avoiding the question. Why do you think Lardy does simple casting, then mini-T, which expands simple casting, then the full T which expands that, then the TT which gives you more opportunity to cast to the over piles before running out of dog?

BTW, if you aren't getting any carryover of casting skills from the TT to blind drills and then to Pattern Blinds, I'd question the manner in which you are running the TT.


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

Lardy does not use the pattern blind field to teach casting. He uses blind drills for that.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

captainjack said:


> For some reason you are cursing and avoiding the question. Why do you think Lardy does simple casting, then mini-T, which expands simple casting, then the full T which expands that, then the TT which gives you more opportunity to cast to the over piles before running out of dog?
> 
> BTW, if you aren't getting any carryover of casting skills from the TT to blind drills and then to Pattern Blinds, I'd question the manner in which you are running the TT.


 Lardy does mini-T?

Do people really "run out of dog"?

Because I've never witnessed any such thing. Even with first timers.
They don't "ruin" the dog. They just don't train the dog.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

copterdoc said:


> Because I've never witnessed any such thing. Even with first timers.
> They don't "ruin" the dog. They just don't train the dog.


What a load of horse manure.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> Lardy does mini-T?
> 
> Do people really "run out of dog"?
> 
> ...


If you are going to tell me Lardy is doing it wrong, I want to know what basis you have for coming to that conclusion.

Yes they do. "Run out of dog" = dog getting too tired to continue running the drill. Have you never witnessed a tired dog?

No one said ruin.

Here is a pic of Lardy's description of the TT. The Mini T is explained and pictured on the following page. I thought you were versed in Lardy's program. I guess not?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

captainjack said:


> If you are going to tell me Lardy is doing it wrong, I want to know what basis you have for coming to that conclusion......


 That's not my conclusion.

However I do think, that if you think, that the TT is run without the intention of "creating" any "issues" then I really, really, really do conclude that you should *STOP* running the TT until you can explain to yourself why you are running the TT.

Other than just because, "Lardy does it".


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

I would say doing something "just because Lardy does it" is probably a lot smarter than listening to someone on the Internet with no name.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Yes Copterdoc, I run it because Lardy runs it and for the same reason he runs it. Mike is in the Retriever Hall of Fame, has won the National 7 times. 13 dogs trained primarily at Handjem are in the Retriever Hall of Fames and have won numerous National Amateur Championships.

I've had a reasonable amount of success following Mike's program (Amateur Placements and finishes with 3 of the 4 dogs I've trained).

Dennis Voigt says that we should look for advice from proven sources. I follow Lardy's program and rely heavily on information from Retrievers ONLINE.

Why should I abandon Lardy's program and follow the teachings of Copterdoc? What have you done and how many people following your guidance have accomplished more than even me?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

If the OP had actually completed the TT, his dog wouldn't be popping on pattern blinds.
It certainly wouldn't still be getting worse.

He might have gone through all of the motions. 
But he didn't achieve the objectives of the training.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> If the OP had actually completed the TT, his dog wouldn't be popping on pattern blinds.
> It certainly wouldn't be getting worse.


FC/AFC dogs pop on blinds and even on marks. Are you saying these dogs have not completed the TT?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what Lardy meant by the following taken from TRT2 manual page 23:

"The Double T combines the pile and simple casting drills in to *a larger scale drill that begins to prepare a dog to cast in a field situation.* 

My post #23 ended with "*The TT teaches casting on a larger scale*. "

Comparing my explanation, which was formed by my study of TRT, to what Mike wrote in the TRT manual, I'd say I have a fairly good grasp on the why. But I'm not sure...


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

captainjack said:


> FC/AFC dogs pop on blinds and even on marks. Are you saying these dogs have not completed the TT?


 If a dog pops, it still needs further training.

It doesn't matter what it has accomplished in the past.

But popping on a pattern blind? 
I mean really?

The dog knows _exactly _where a pattern blind is located.
So why on Earth would a dog that has already been thoroughly conditioned to not pop, still pop on a pattern blind?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> If a dog pops, it still needs further training.
> 
> It doesn't matter what it has accomplished in the past.
> 
> ...


Read some of the suggestions people have made.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

I hope the OP has learned one thing from this back and forth with Copterdoc.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

captainjack said:


> Read some of the suggestions people have made.


 I did.
That's why I posted in the first place.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

copterdoc said:


> If a dog pops, it still needs further training.
> 
> It doesn't matter what it has accomplished in the past.
> 
> ...



Copterdoc,

For someone who won't even post her real name, you sure do have an awful lot of absolutes.

I know that if I were the original poster, I'd be leaning toward the conservative side rather than going on faith that if I kept pressuring the dog through it, I could MAKE him do my will.

That's how dogs get ruined and I think it's a very sensitive place for anyone to put himself (or herself) as a recommender of training methods.

Of course - when one is literally afraid - and lord knows I've tried to get you to overcome this fear - to identify herself - maybe it makes it easier to delve into more riskier methods without any validation to prove opinions with credentials.

*********************

As I wrote in the other quoted thread from a few years ago - I do think that there are folks, particularly those who trained in a time and under a mentor who DID NOT have access to the variable intensity of the remote training tool we have today, where it was perhaps more common to push the dog outside the guardrails only to make the dog come back to center.

I believe that today, it is possible, and likely much, much more conservative and reasonable, for a trainer to work to keep the dog within those guardrails.

Dex Doolittle mentioned the same concept very adeptly in that thread. 

Why intentionally push the dog outside the guardrail when you really don't have any guarantee that you can bring him back inside, and retain his trust, his drive, his spirit? Could Rex do it? Sure. Did Rex's students see it done? Absolutely. Did Rex's students learn how it works? Sure.

Would REX EVER post the kind of advise you're posting on this website without ever seeing the dog? 

NO! I don't believe he would. I think he knew very clearly that he had to see it and live it before making such suggestions.

It is not safe, nor responsible to suggest to someone sight-unseen that more pressure will somehow resolve a training issue. This is a specific individual with a specific training question - not some theoretical discussion of philosophy.


Chris

***********************


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Chris Atkinson said:


> ..........I know that if I were the original poster, I'd be leaning toward the conservative side rather than going on faith that if I kept pressuring the dog through it, I could MAKE him do my will.
> 
> That's how dogs get ruined and I think it's a very sensitive place for anyone to put himself as a recommender of training methods. would...............


 I'm not by any means saying that I've seen everything. 
But I've never seen a dog "ruined" by an inexperienced Trainer that has used too much "pressure".

Maybe you have, but I have not.

I've seen plenty of dogs that were left chronically untrained, by inexperienced "Trainers" that were so afraid that they would "ruin" their dog, that they wouldn't (or couldn't) complete the steps that are necessary to actually train the dog.

I feel that this "ruin the dog" stigma is clouding our judgement. 
More times than not.

These programs provide guidelines. They provide some direction, and define some objectives.
However, they do not train the dogs. The dog still needs to be trained by a Trainer.


----------



## Madluke (Dec 3, 2010)

" Popping can be the result of too much or inappropriate pressure, low retrieving desire or birdieness , or simply confusion. ( Pity the confused dog with low retrieving desire that is getting too much pressure- a not uncommon enough scenario.) " 

Mike Lardy - problem solving popping Training with Mike Lardy Volume II


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

copterdoc said:


> I'm not by any means saying that I've seen everything.
> But I've never seen a dog "ruined" by an inexperienced Trainer that used too much "pressure".
> 
> Maybe you have, but I have not.
> ...


This is the irresponsible part Copterdoc.

You have never seen this original poster's dog.

Yes I have seen dogs that were overpressured and it affected their attitude and their performance. The fact that you have not may be artificially creating a sense of confidence that "more pressure" is a cure all.

That could actually be the worse thing this person could do.

This started off with a specific individual seeking specific answers for a specific dog. 

More pressure, applied in a systematic fashion, might work. Then again, it might literally put the dog in a heap.

Chris


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Chris Atkinson said:


> This is the irresponsible part Copterdoc.
> 
> You have never seen this original poster's dog.
> 
> ...


 I never said anything about "more pressure".

He needs to train the dog. That may involve more pressure. But the solution probably doesn't involve running away from, or avoiding, pressure in training.

You can't train a dog, all the while avoiding it's exposure to pressure at the same time.
Pressure is like Gravity. It exists whether we like it or not.


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

copterdoc said:


> I'm not by any means saying that I've seen everything.
> But I've never seen a dog "ruined" by an inexperienced Trainer that has used too much "pressure".
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> ........Double T precedes all my drills as a Basics level step that moves some of the Pile Work skills to a larger scale. it also adds in "over" lessons. In the Double-T. I expect to encounter issues such as flaring, popping, poor sits, no-goes, and more. I do not "try" to get them. I simply progress the dog at the outer edge. If I see those problems, I can deal with them here MUCH better than in the field later.


 That's a really good way to put it.

It's not a problem, until it's a problem. And then, if it's still a problem, I really do need to fix the problem.
The TT is a really good place for that to happen.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Daren Galloway said:


> I would say doing something "just because Lardy does it" is probably a lot smarter than listening to someone on the Internet with no name.


Post of the week!!!


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

For Pete sake...These are pattern blinds...to create confident and momentum for the dog...not for the trainer.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Chris A is it possible to put a warning label on the anonymous Copter Docs posts?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

copterdoc said:


> I never said anything about "more pressure".
> 
> He needs to train the dog. That may involve more pressure. But the solution probably doesn't involve running away from, or avoiding, pressure in training.
> 
> ...


I believe that I truly do feel empathy for dogs that you own and dogs you train.


I personally have zero control over gravity. I do feel that I have a very large degree of control over the pressure that my dog feel and the pressure that my dogs need to experience.

I feel that pressure is more like ammunition and like a bullet. Once one pulls the trigger, she can never take that back. The downrange damage is done. Similarly, a smart shooter is conservative with his ammo. 

There can be many times when the solution to the problem does not require pulling trigger. I do believe the original poster in this thread will have the ability to filter various opinions and hopefully make wise decisions that optimize his chances for success.

edit: I chose to review my post and realized my signature line was something that made a big enough impression upon me that I choose to type it in during a prior discussion on a similar topic.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Advice on the Internet is like advice in the gallery of a test. It is freely given. The difference is you don't get to see the advisor run his/her dogs. Can still be incredibly spot on but a little more due diligence is required.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

copterdoc said:


> In that case, you should remove the TT from your program. Skip over it, and move on.
> There are other drills and methods, that will far better fit with your training philosophy.
> 
> Because by design, the TT "creates" issues.
> ...


I remain simply amazed by your answers. 

To suggest that b/c one doesn't create issues on the DT then don't use that training philosphy doesn't make sense. 

The T work doesn't mean you go out & create issues w/ your dog. Lardy in his DT notes tells of giving a dog plenty of freebies or you will create popping by stoping him on the line too often. It does not say to stop the dog on the line often & create popping? then use correction. That is a person mistake which you probably should avoid. IMO. 

Lardy does tell you how to deal w/ popping if it occurs b/c a dog's reaction to being forced may be to react by certain behaviors. Lardy in his notes gives corrections for these behaviors (bugging, popping) you may encounter. 

I consider the T a very valuable tool & a step I would not miss in my teaching of my dog. IMO

The last step of DT is the disciplined casting which prepares you for SB or to assist in teaching your dog on returns from a retrieve, not to avoid an cover or an obstacle. You can't go wrong teaching your dog this step.IMO

Another thing about Lardy's teachings that I read & very much like is the statement "better to avoid these problems w/ well timed praise, correction & SIMPLIFICATION".

I suggest people do follow DT as written by Lardy. It makes sense, it works & is proven. 

And whoever Copterdoc is; he/she should reveal his name, is not making sense AGAIN. JMHO


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

I was being especially Phase II last night. I should have just kept my mouth shut.

I'm deeply sorry, and I apologize to the OP, Mary Lynn, captainjack, Chris and Dennis.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

copterdoc said:


> I was being especially Phase II last night. I should have just kept my mouth shut.
> 
> I'm deeply sorry, and I apologize to the OP, Mary Lynn, captainjack, Chris and Dennis.


Wow! Well you're way, way, way ahead of many of us who have a hard time typing out what you just did.

I told someone yesterday who'd deleted a post regarding a buyer/seller dispute, that if I had a nickel for every mistake I made on RTF, I"d be pretty wealthy.

Have a good weekend Ms. Copterdoc, Mr. Copterdoc....seriously. And remember my PM from a few days ago please. 

The offer is still there.

Sincerely, Chris


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

we have a second clue into the identity of the "copterdoc".

the first and one we have known for a while: *copterdoc's occupation is either*, a. an individual specializing in mechanic/maintenace work on helicopters or b. an emrgency physician working on patients being transported in choppers.

the second: *copterdoc is married * you gotta be married to apologize that well.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

WOW unexpected apology but thanks Copterdoc! Hope some day we get to know who you really are!


----------



## PDO (Jul 25, 2014)

Dear all,

I wanted to bring this thread back from the dead to give a big thanks to all that responded. The back and forth was very helpful, and I think I got something from just about every post.

Just an update on how we got through it and where we are at:

1. The obvious forcing on back should have been done sooner, perhaps on the pops that came soon after attrition failed. The ultimate solution was 2 meaningful forces on back and we did not have a pop on the PBs thereafter. I read and saw so much "avoid the collar as much as possible during PBs" that I was too hesitant to use it. Afterall, a pop is a violation of GO and a simple force earlier could have prevented myself from digging a deeper hole.

2. Completing swimby did help with his blind attitude. Getting through Swimby was night and day easier than TT. I think Roseberry said it, the description of why you do swimby can be muddy water, but "putting more soul into the dog" is definitely one of the reasons.

3. The popping clearly started because I blew a few whistles too close. Should have let the dog roll for a moment before stopping, and should have spent one or two days ironing out the outside legs before teaching the center PB. Progressed just a hair too fast for my dog.

4. A side note, Snow goose season provided an opportune period for early transition. Lots of chances for long marked blinds and long, almost factor free cold blinds with a bright white goose as a target.

After chasing snows up to the Canadian border, we have finished PBs, swimby, blind drills, a few remote blind drills (doing a few more now), started decheating, and have run a variety of marked, walk around, and channel blinds. Going to revisit the PB field for diversions before beginning to graduate to a cold blind standard.

Thanks again!

PO


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

pdo,
congrats on the progress. i imagine a crippled, walking, flapping, white goose at 300 yards indeed builds a great deal of confidence when you say "back"!


----------

