# What Training Method is best for YOUR dog?



## Gauge123 (Dec 3, 2012)

I am from the south (Louisiana). Eating is one thing we do well. As such, I have learned a thing or two about cooking. 
When I am working on a dish, that I am unfamiliar with, I will always review several recipes by looking them up in cook books or on line.
Now, I am looking for the recipe’ for this young Boykin I am training. In so doing, I have spent a lot of money on DVD’s and books. Some of you made these DVD’s. I have also asked a lot of questions on this forum and from trainers I can talk to.
Now, after countless hours of watching videos and reading, I am developing a plan. I am writing it down lest I forget (a real problem I have). 
So the next time I am asked “what program are you using” I can say Gauge’s Program. Some will no doubt be skeptical; some will immediately wash their hands of offering any help. 
Perhaps this decision disqualifies me from being able to ask for advice. I’ve lived with my decisions before.
You see, the thing is, I can watch a DVD of you training a dog, but you can’t see my dog. Every training method must be adjusted to some degree to meet the dog’s ability and temperament. After all, it is about the dog.
While I am reading or watching, I am thinking the whole time about Gauge. My mind says “yes, I see where that will help us (Gauge and I)” or “No, that will not work with Gauge because….”. Sometimes I see a procedure and I know right away that with a slight deviation I can use the basic concept.
Thanks to each of you that had input either here or in your training literature. If I am successful, I’ll owe it to you for paving the way.
In closing, for you guys that make a profit out of selling your training literature/skills, here is a suggestion for your next book_. The Top Ten Training Problems and How to Correct Them_. Read the last 100 problems that have shown up on this forum and count the ones that showed up the most often.


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

I hear Gooser made some DVD's in the 70's. I don't think they was about Dog training though.


----------



## tejohns3 (Jul 23, 2010)

Best thing would do is hook up with a trainer there and get help there. I would get on entry express and look up when the next hunt test or what not is going to happen in your area and do some meeting and greeting.


----------



## achiro (Jun 17, 2003)

"Gauge's Program"="Hodgepodge Training" and has been tried over and over with few having great success. It generally results in many holes that may or may not be "patched". Those that are "patched" almost always require large jumps backwards in training that could have been avoided altogether if the training had been done correctly the first time. Most dogs trained this way show massive amounts of confusion which can lead to hesitance, avoidance, and (at worst) aggression. 
Hey but it's your pup...have at it and have fun building that mousetrap.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

It's not so much which program is best for your dog, as it is which program is best for _you_ as a trainer. You're the one who will be trying to convey the information to the dog. Take a closer look and see what seems most logical and clear to you.

Evan


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

The hodgepodge system was what we started with and I believe it hinderd our training ability due to holes /bad habits from me and my dog (mostly me).You can read all you want but until you spend time with someone that has the knowledge of this type of training standing behind you and training you and your dog it's hard to fully understand the material you have read. 

I fully believe now that if there was a better way out there, the people that have spent countless hours training wound have put pen to paper. It's much easi*er* to understand and follow a proven method that it is to make up a swiss cheese recipe and have success. (I dont think it is necessarily easy to follow a program ) 


As far a top ten problems...in most cases if you follow a good program and a good mentor the problems are a lot less likely to happen ,because of the experience of the trainer ,they have dealt with the problem in the past and created solutions to the problems they have encountered. 



Previous hodgepodge trainer regards.


----------



## tejohns3 (Jul 23, 2010)

Exactly what kind of problems are you having with your dog if you dont mind sharing?


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

> When I am working on a dish, that I am unfamiliar with, I will always review several recipes by looking them up in cook books or on line


.

it is good to look at a few then choose and stick with one. Be like putting turnip greens in your jello salad.




> My mind says “yes, I see where that will help us (Gauge and I)” or “No, that will not work with Gauge because….”.


what are some things you see that you are sure your dog will not do, and why?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

I think it's hilarious that a "cookbook dog training" post actually started out talking about cooking.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Ken Bora said:


> .
> 
> it is good to look at a few then choose and stick with one. Be like putting turnip greens in your jello salad.


 That's not nearly as good as your walk-to-the-outhouse analogy.


----------



## archer66 (Jul 23, 2012)

I see absolutely no reason why it wouldn't be a great idea to pull certain components from different training methods. Matter of fact I think I've seen a number of posts here on RTF saying exactly that. When I read the original post I don't see someone who is "hodgepodgeing" or half assing or anything like that. I see a guy who is trying to put together a program using what he considers to be the best components of more than one method for himself and his dog. If a guy truly has a grasp for the reason for each step in these programs then he should be able to cover all of the needs of a successful program by combining. Dog training isn't rocket science, it isn't like there are only 3 ways to train a dog....Smartworks, Lardy, Hillman...(not picking on those just mentioning them because they are the most often mentioned on RTF in my experieince).....and to say that if there was a better way then someone would have already put it on paper is close minded. I can't fathom going through life believing the world is truly flat and there are only a select few ways to train a dog.

Obviously I don't know if the op has any idea what he's getting in to but to simply assume he's messing up by developing his own system isn't fair to the op if ya ask me.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

copterdoc said:


> That's not nearly as good as your walk-to-the-outhouse analogy.



in an earlier post 123 had typed he had just fallen off of a turnip truck. 
I like to try and help using folks own lifestyle in my reply if I can. 
Shirley you have noted that by now?


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

archer66 said:


> I see absolutely no reason why it wouldn't be a great idea to pull certain components from different training methods. Matter of fact I think I've seen a number of posts here on RTF saying exactly that. When I read the original post I don't see someone who is "hodgepodgeing" or half assing or anything like that. I see a guy who is trying to put together a program using what he considers to be the best components of more than one method for himself and his dog.....


 The methods are not important. The objectives are.



archer66 said:


> If a guy truly has a grasp for the reason for each step in these programs then he should be able to cover all of the needs of a successful program by combining.


 Do you think he does?


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Hmm, it takes a lot of years experience to make decisions like 123 is suggesting. I'm not sure that I would want to say I have a better method than Mike Lardy, etc. and I have been at it quite a while. I deviate occassionally because you have to read the dog but they are very minor in the big picture.


----------



## archer66 (Jul 23, 2012)

copterdoc said:


> The methods are not important. The objectives are.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think he does?



Objectives is exactly what is important....that was the point I was trying to make when I said as long as a guy understands the reasons for each step in a given program. Expanding on that thought he should then be able to choose components of varying programs or maybe even develop his own component to get to a certain goal in a given stage of training.

I don't know the op so I have NO IDEA if he will be successful. I'm simply arguing against the notion that there are no "new" ways to train a dog.


----------



## archer66 (Jul 23, 2012)

Hey folks....I could sit here and discuss this stuff with you great folks all day but I'm going outside with my dog to spend 20 minutes working on HEEL...SIT....HEEL and then I'm going bow hunting for deer with my old bear recurve. 

Today and tomorrow is it for Missouri's deer season....can't believe it's over already.

Ya'll have a nice day!!


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

archer66 said:


> Objectives is exactly what is important....that was the point I was trying to make when I said as long as a guy understands the reasons for each step in a given program.


 Agreed. 
But, it's kinda hard for a first time trainer, to know that stuff isn't it?





archer66 said:


> ....Expanding on that thought he should then be able to choose components of varying programs or maybe even develop his own component to get to a certain goal in a given stage of training.....


 But, he doesn't know the "goal" for each step, or why the steps are where they are. 
It can't be "explained" either.

You gotta go through it a few times, in order to understand the "whys" and be able to tell when you are "done".


----------



## BobbyLight (Feb 4, 2012)

I can definitely relate to the OP because it was just a year ago that I was watching every DVD and reading every book out there on dog training to get ready for the arrival of my Boykin Spaniel... I will say that it is extremely important to have a plan and objectives to aim for, but the best advice I could give you is to find a knowledgeable pro that you trust! Even if you don't want to ship your dog off for training, and spend big money, at least find someone you can take a few lessons from, and call when your dog isn't doing exactly what the 2xNAFC demo dog is on the DVD! Use that pro as a mentor and a coach, because as amateurs we have just as much to learn (if not more) than the dog!

Also, don't drink the "Boykin Kool-Aid"... no they are not labs, and yes sometimes they require a little different finesse... but they are still dogs, and you still want the same results, so take them through the same training and don't let them get away with stuff because they are small, soft, and cute... they will exploit it every single time! Haha, a lot of Boykin owners/trainers remind me of homeschoolers... yes we all know your dog is "special" but he also has no friends or social skills! I think if we all raise our standards then in the next decade we are going to see a lot more MH and HRCH Boykin Spaniels, and prove just how incredible these LBD's can be.


----------



## dpate (Mar 16, 2011)

The training steps of the popular training programs were not thrown together. They were developed after 1000s of dogs and designed to work with almost all dogs. So it should not be the program that is changed depending on the nature of the dog, but how the program is implemented. I.e. more pressure less pressure, faster pace slower pace, more OB or more excitement. Well you get the picture. 

After you've trained a hundred dogs or so then I would feel comfortable making changes to the training progression.


----------



## achiro (Jun 17, 2003)

archer66 said:


> I can't fathom going through life believing the world is truly flat and there are only a select few ways to train a dog. I never said that
> 
> Obviously I don't know if the op has any idea what he's getting in to (He doesn't) but to simply assume he's messing up by developing his own system(He is) isn't fair to the op if ya ask me.(I didn't )


It's apparent that you are in a similar situation as the OP. Nothing wrong at all about being new to all of this, all of us were at some point, but don't be offended when someone that knows better offers up some advise.


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

archer66 said:


> I see absolutely no reason why it wouldn't be a great idea to pull certain components from different training methods. Matter of fact I think I've seen a number of posts here on RTF saying exactly that. When I read the original post I don't see someone who is "hodgepodgeing" or half assing or anything like that. I see a guy who is trying to put together a program using what he considers to be the best components of more than one method for himself and his dog. If a guy truly has a grasp for the reason for each step in these programs then he should be able to cover all of the needs of a successful program by combining. Dog training isn't rocket science, it isn't like there are only 3 ways to train a dog....Smartworks, Lardy, Hillman...(not picking on those just mentioning them because they are the most often mentioned on RTF in my experieince).....and to say that if there was a better way then someone would have already put it on paper is close minded. I can't fathom going through life believing the world is truly flat and there are only a select few ways to train a dog.
> 
> Obviously I don't know if the op has any idea what he's getting in to but to simply assume he's messing up by developing his own system isn't fair to the op if ya ask me.


I was implying that I am sure he is not the first new trainer to put together a " Gauge’s Program",I thought that that was the best way also,and realized that my plan wasnt getting me where I wanted to go,so I had to decide on Lardy or Graham since I had material from both of them in my desk.

I do believe that the methods that are most widely used have been tried and tested and have had proven results. 

I'm sure there is a lot of experienced trainers that add a twist or 2 to their program which has had positive results,but I'd say most are still big named based. 

Even Lardy say's that his program is Carr based,but how many dog's did he train to be able to improve on it?

I dont think it is close minded to believe in proven results.

Good news about cooking is if you mess it up you can throw it in the trash and start over or feed it to your dog.

Good luck with the stick and string ,its cold out!


----------



## Gauge123 (Dec 3, 2012)

The responses to this thread have been more enlightening than any other thread I have read.
So there are 5 guys in North America that received a revelation in dog training and published their epiphany. I must also assume that they are masters in communication and each DVD/book is so expertly written or demonstrated that there is no room for shortcomings. No matter what the trainers experience might be, no matter which dog is used, each one will be developed to master hunter level because the programs are infallible and perfectly explained. 
The only other explanation would have to be that the trainer did not follow the program to the letter; an all too easy explanation for failing to match the right method to the right dog or failure on the part of the publisher to clearly explain the steps.
This assumption also tells us that a fresh perspective from, a guy that that has hunted over dogs for 40 years, could not possibly see the value of merging two of these programs. Thereby, taking nothing away but rather utilizing the experience from these men and knowledge of this particular dog’s strengths and weaknesses. 
The advice of follow a program is sound. I agree that there are steps involved. I also believe that to leave out steps is to create “holes”. 5 methods have shown 5 ways to teach hold conditioning. Are they all right or are they all wrong?
I plan to borrow hold conditioning from publisher “A” while following the methods from publisher “B”. I also want to introduce CC where publisher “C” began rather than where publisher “B” did, because it makes more sense TO ME.
Even the videos tell you “if Fido doesn’t get it you can try......”
Too assume there is no room for improvement in any one of these programs is what you guys call GDG.


----------



## tejohns3 (Jul 23, 2010)

Gauge123 said:


> The responses to this thread have been more enlightening than any other thread I have read.
> So there are 5 guys in North America that received a revelation in dog training and published their epiphany. I must also assume that they are masters in communication and each DVD/book is so expertly written or demonstrated that there is no room for shortcomings. No matter what the trainers experience might be, no matter which dog is used, each one will be developed to master hunter level because the programs are infallible and perfectly explained.
> The only other explanation would have to be that the trainer did not follow the program to the letter; an all too easy explanation for failing to match the right method to the right dog or failure on the part of the publisher to clearly explain the steps.
> This assumption also tells us that a fresh perspective from, a guy that that has hunted over dogs for 40 years, could not possibly see the value of merging two of these programs. Thereby, taking nothing away but rather utilizing the experience from these men and knowledge of this particular dog’s strengths and weaknesses.
> ...


 First of all we are not talking about someone who has hunted over dogs for 40 years , we are talking to someone who has a pup and is trying to get started in this game, 
Second he is talking about reading and watching every book out there and making his own (program) and he knows what is right for his dog and what isn't, in a training prospective


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

Good luck ....


----------



## achiro (Jun 17, 2003)

Gauge123 said:


> The responses to this thread have been more enlightening than any other thread I have read.
> So there are 5 guys in North America that received a revelation in dog training and published their epiphany. I must also assume that they are masters in communication and each DVD/book is so expertly written or demonstrated that there is no room for shortcomings. No matter what the trainers experience might be, no matter which dog is used, each one will be developed to master hunter level because the programs are infallible and perfectly explained.
> The only other explanation would have to be that the trainer did not follow the program to the letter; an all too easy explanation for failing to match the right method to the right dog or failure on the part of the publisher to clearly explain the steps.
> This assumption also tells us that a fresh perspective from, a guy that that has hunted over dogs for 40 years, could not possibly see the value of merging two of these programs. Thereby, taking nothing away but rather utilizing the experience from these men and knowledge of this particular dog’s strengths and weaknesses.
> ...


It's always awesome when someone that doesn't know what he doesn't know gets on here to tell folks that do, how it's gonna be but then when they tell him he might want to rethink it, he tells them that THEY are wrong. You know, cause he's smart and stuff.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Gauge123 said:


> Too assume there is no room for improvement in any one of these programs is what you guys call GDG.


I don't think anyone seriously assumes there is no room for improvement in any of these programs. Lots of folks have improved on the various programs. However these are mostly guys with big trucks full of dogs with letters in front of their name. 

To assume that some dude who just bought and read them and has very little experience is the guy to improve upon, say Lardy's program, is just silly. I'm not saying that someone can't, I am just saying that I would bet the mortgage that person would end up sending the dog to a pro to fix the problems created before I bet they would come up with a better program.

BTW, I follow Doublehaul's program. I train my critters just about every weekend whether they need it or not. DVDs coming soon.


----------



## tejohns3 (Jul 23, 2010)

DoubleHaul said:


> I don't think anyone seriously assumes there is no room for improvement in any of these programs. Lots of folks have improved on the various programs. However these are mostly guys with big trucks full of dogs with letters in front of their name.
> 
> To assume that some dude who just bought and read them and has very little experience is the guy to improve upon, say Lardy's program, is just silly. I'm not saying that someone can't, I am just saying that I would bet the mortgage that person would end up sending the dog to a pro Andfix the problems created before I bet they would come up with a better program.
> 
> BTW, I follow Doublehaul's program. I train my critters just about every weekend whether they need it or not. DVDs coming soon.


I dont think anyone could have said it better than you just did.


----------



## archer66 (Jul 23, 2012)

achiro said:


> It's apparent that you are in a similar situation as the OP. Nothing wrong at all about being new to all of this, all of us were at some point, but don't be offended when someone that knows better offers up some advise.



I'm not offended in the least. People disagree all the time. That's life. I'm also not in the same boat as the op. I AM relatively new to training dogs all you have to do is read some of my posts to figure that out. However I am following Smartworks to the letter..... I haven't even looked at Hillmans system or Lardy's...mostly because I'm satisfied with Smartworks. Sam is my second dog....my first one began his training almost ten years ago and for that I used Wolter's Water Dog system which today is discounted on here as out of date and inferior. I discovered smartworks when my first dog...Remi...was three. I used smartworks for his continued training, mostly on handling and and for re-enforcing commands he already knew. Imagine that....I used two different systems for the SAME dog....oh my GAAAWWWDDDD I probably ruined that dog....he sure did retrieve a lot of ducks for a ruined dog. 

Like I said before I have no idea if the op is going to have any luck with his plan....but rather than tell him it won't work without actually SEEING it is close minded. THAT is what prompted my post.


----------



## tejohns3 (Jul 23, 2010)

Wolters is outdated? New to me ,Hell im rereading top dog for the umpteenth time but when you train dogs and learn mutiple personalities from training different dogs then sometimes you need to refesh on the stuff youve used before and that goes back to what youve said before, basically. Using everything your saying im just not understanding how your getting the op saying hes read all the books and watched. all the dvds to what your sayin using just 2? Btw mostly the base of smartworks is from wolters to me personaly but i just might be comparing things differently for some reason


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

tejohns3 said:


> Wolters is outdated? New to me ,Hell im rereading top dog for the umpteenth time but when you train dogs and learn mutiple personalities from training different dogs then sometimes you need to refesh on the stuff youve used before and that goes back to what youve said before, basically. Using everything your saying im just not understanding how your getting the op saying hes read all the books and watched. all the dvds to what your sayin using just 2? *Btw mostly the base of smartworks is from wolters *to me personaly but i just might be comparing things differently for some reason


Who knew? Next thing you know Evan will be teaching handling with the whistle...


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

tejohns3 said:


> Btw *mostly the base of smartworks is from wolters *to me personaly but i just might be comparing things differently for some reason


Excuse me? How so?

Evan


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Evan said:


> It's not so much which program is best for your dog, as it is which program is best for _you_ as a trainer. You're the one who will be trying to convey the information to the dog. Take a closer look and see what seems most logical and clear to you.
> 
> Evan



Here is good advice ....All the programs available will get you the results in the end...If you follow the sequence ....That is the danger of mixing and matching if you are not a well schooled trainer ...Things need to fit together in a sequence of logical order...If the order is not correct the dog is hindered in training ...putting the cart before the horse as they say ...The method of teaching (drills used ) blinds is not important if it works...IE:the discussion of TT or some other way....In the end does the dog have the necessary skills to run cold blinds....? Steve S


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

tejohns3 said:


> Wolters is outdated? New to me ,Hell im rereading top dog for the umpteenth time but when you train dogs and learn mutiple personalities from training different dogs then sometimes you need to refesh on the stuff youve used before and that goes back to what youve said before, basically. Using everything your saying im just not understanding how your getting the op saying hes read all the books and watched. all the dvds to what your sayin using just 2? *Btw mostly the base of smartworks is from wolters to me personaly* but i just might be comparing things differently for some reason


I doubt if Evan ever studied under Wolters... Richard didn't invent the material in his books either ...Find a book by James Free or Charles Morgan ....He may have tweaked some things to better suite his way of thinking though...Just as all good trainer have done for the last 40 years...Bobby George wrote a book titled the Cotton Pershall method...Evan wrote one titled the Evan way ..Lardy wrote one ,the Mike way ...And on and on the list will go ..." there is none thing new under the sun " ...there are very few true inventors ...a lot of tweakers though ....Rex didn't invent the collar or the program to implement its use but he sure did refine
the way it is now made and used ....Vent over ....good night all ..Steve S


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

steve schreiner said:


> I doubt if Evan ever studied under Wolters... Richard didn't invent the material in his books either ...Find a book by James Free or Charles Morgan ....He may have tweaked some things to better suite his way of thinking though...Just as all good trainer have done for the last 40 years...Bobby George wrote a book titled the Cotton Pershall method...Evan wrote one titled the Evan way ..Lardy wrote one ,the Mike way ...And on and on the list will go ..." there is none thing new under the sun " ...there are very few true inventors ...a lot of tweakers though ....Rex didn't invent the collar or the program to implement its use but he sure did refine
> the way it is now made and used ....Vent over ....good night all ..Steve S


Great post Steve. Can't add a thing to it....Perfect.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

> After you've trained a hundred dogs or so then I would feel comfortable making changes to the training progression.


Dang, I know that isn't going to happen in my lifetime.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I have trained well over a hundred dogs. I train mostly gundogs and most only stay about 3-4 months. I now define 4 months as the minimum time in which I will take a dog on. Still I don't feel comfortable taking bits and pieces from multiple programs or make substantial changes to established programs. Sometimes I will change the order of a few things as Mike Lardy has said he is not a slave to the flow chart. But this is generally when to start collar conditioning.

Yes Wolters in outdated. He did not use a force base system. Later in life he recognized the need for the force and actually had others do his force work. I met Wolters and think he contributed a lot to the retriever world. In the latest dvds from the people that took over the Wolters name, they acknowledge this up front.

I don't think Evan's program has anything to do with Wolters except that both are training retrievers. I am not totally familiar with Smartworks, as I follow TRT, but I have been to one of his seminars.

While I don't like to dwell on the negative, the mix and match suggestion came from someone that is apparently very new to training. I would suggest that this is a not a good plan.


----------



## Gauge123 (Dec 3, 2012)

QUOTES:
 “it's hard to fully understand the material you have read.”
Then you had best use a trainer
“But, he doesn't know the "goal" for each step, or why the steps are where they are. 
It can't be "explained" either.”
This was my favorite response, you don’t know the goal and you can’t explain it, yet can offer advice? To assume “he” doesn’t know the goal is assuming.
“we are not talking about someone who has hunted over dogs for 40 years”
Excuse me, but yes we are.
“doesn't know what he doesn't know”
However, I do know what it is that I am trying to get out of the DVDs. 

I threw this out there so I deserve what I get. Some responses were polite and firmly expressed the need to complete each step. I will definitely take it to heart. I know I’m going out on a limb. It’s a little scary. But I am going out there with known goals and as much knowledge as I can gather.
Other responses sound more like lemmings. 
You can’t do that. Why not? Because, many have tried, and most have failed. Why did they fail? Because, they didn’t follow the steps. What are the steps? I don’t know. Oh, then I better not try.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Evan said:


> Excuse me? How so?
> 
> Evan


Thought that would get your attention!


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Ken Bora said:


> .what are some things you see that you are sure your dog will not do, and why?


again, I ask. what is it you think your Boykin will not do?
many of the Breed Related myths are just that.
Like how Goldens don't like water and Labs Lay by the door and Chessies smell bad.


----------



## achiro (Jun 17, 2003)

Gauge123 said:


> QUOTES:
> “it's hard to fully understand the material you have read.”
> Then you had best use a trainer
> “But, he doesn't know the "goal" for each step, or why the steps are where they are.
> ...


Nobody said that they didn't know the steps. Someone may have said they didn't know the steps because they didnt know which programs you were using. You do what you want, it's your dog. Anything is usually better than nothing but people here have tried to offer you advice based on years of experience of actually doing it. People that know the problems you can create doing what you are suggesting are trying to help you but you continue to take the, "I can because I'm different" approach. Truth is any of us that have been around dogs for any amount of time have been around people like you(some were you). Anyone that has spent any time on this site have seen people like you. You may end up getting what you want out of the dog but you will have holes, you will have spent unnecessary time on redundancy(ending up with a confused or bored dog), and you will probably need advice that you are either to proud to ask for or have nobody left to ask because they are tired of trying to help someone who won't listen.


----------



## achiro (Jun 17, 2003)

Your first post on this forum. 


Gauge123 said:


> OK, Gauge is now 11 months old he is a Boykin Spaniel. I worked with him until he was 6 months and took him to a trainer for 4 months. He came home about 3 weeks ago. I feel that overall he is coming along nicely. His desire is good. His delivery to hand is exactly what I want. His marking skills are good (not great yet but with experience and continued training he will shine).
> Now, his casting is where I have some concerns. He is what the trainer called sticking. I think that’s a fitting name for it.
> The drill is done in this manner. Take the dog and a bumper along a straight path (75 yards). Command Gauge sit, watch, then toss the bumper at a tree near the end of the path. Gauge and I go back to the starting point and turn right to place a second bumper 90° to the first (again at the end of a nice path).
> We retrace our steps and I lead Gauge half way back to the first bumper. Gauge sit. I back up to the starting point and recall Gauge. He starts toward me and I give one blast of the whistle for him to stop.
> ...


Here's the thing. You say yourself in this post that you have no experience. 40 years of hunting over a dog does not give one experience in training. It's ok to not know, it's not ok to not know but keep telling yourself that you do. Sometimes the hardest thing to do is STFU and listen. It takes swallowing ones pride and that usually tastes terrible. There isn't a person on this site that gives advise without the dogs interest coming first. If you remember that it is about the dog it does make it a bit easier to take the beating yourself. 
I'm going to say this and it's probably my last post on the topic. You said yourself that the dog is sensitive. IF that is true, the WORST thing in the world you can do to him is take a chance of adding any confusion. Then what do you do? 
Simplified:
If you use a specific program and run into problems, people that know the program can easily help you through it.
If you hodgepodge it and run into problems, cures are much harder to find and usually require going back through the steps of a program so that you can then fix it. 
Which do you think would be easier on the dog?


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Achiro, for some reason you are getting a little too wound up over this. I see your point, but I see the OPs as well. One thing I tend to notice a lot on this side of the forum is a whole lot of for certain advice given out by some who you find out later are getting ready to run their first hunt test or FT or whatever... Just because someone has years of experience on a keyboard doesn't always translate to to dog training. Not saying this is you..


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

Many years ago, I was involved with training harness horses. About once a month, we received a truck load of oats from the local grainery which we stored in a large bin. Every so often, a small portion of those oats were poured down into a bucket past the strong "breeze" created by a fan.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Kwiklabs, I must be dense. ????


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Processed oats


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

huntinman said:


> Processed oats


Processed by the horse????


----------



## Gauge123 (Dec 3, 2012)

“If you use a specific program and run into problems, people that know the program can easily help you through it.
If you hodgepodge it and run into problems, cures are much harder to find and usually require going back through the steps of a program so that you can then fix it.”
Now that is the indisputable risk. 
I have to accept it or stick to one program, even if I think a step is wrong or done better by someone else. I do appreciate the input. I know that what I am doing is controversial. I also know that I could spend weeks defending my reasons for deviating and it still wouldn’t be enough.
Give me a young pup today and I would follow a program.
Gauge is a special case. I still feel that I have to think outside the box to get him where I want him to be. 
I’m going to let this post rest now. Please accept my apologies for upsetting the harmony of the forum.


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

You aint guna get it done sitting in front of your computer...you've got a new program to discover and write.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

road kill said:


> Processed by the horse????


That's what I'm thinkin'


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Gauge123 said:


> “If you use a specific program and run into problems, people that know the program can easily help you through it.
> If you hodgepodge it and run into problems, cures are much harder to find and usually require going back through the steps of a program so that you can then fix it.”
> Now that is the indisputable risk.
> I have to accept it or stick to one program, even if I think a step is wrong or done better by someone else. I do appreciate the input. I know that what I am doing is controversial. I also know that I could spend weeks defending my reasons for deviating and it still wouldn’t be enough.
> ...


Someone here once wrote a pretty good post using an analogy about a beehive. Seems you might have come along and shook the hive a little.;-). Good luck with your dog.


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Gauge123 said:


> Please accept my apologies for upsetting the harmony of the forum.


Yep, that's the last thing anyone wants to do!!!!


----------



## KNorman (Jan 6, 2003)

> I still feel that I have to think outside the box to get him where I want him to be.


Based on what experience?

Training holes are often created by glossing over or not doing a critical step. Cherrypicking programs is a great way to do that.


Shruggg...good luck.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

> Many years ago, I was involved with training harness horses. About once a month, we received a truck load of oats from the local grainery which we stored in a large bin. Every so often, a small portion of those oats were poured down into a bucket past the strong "breeze" created by a fan.


To clarify, "fanning" removes straw, chaff, stones, dirt and dust, weed seeds, and light immature seeds from the "good stuff" - oats. 

Kind of like the "sifting" that is necessary when reading an RTF training thread.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

huntinman said:


> Achiro, for some reason you are getting a little too wound up over this. I see your point, but I see the OPs as well. One thing I tend to notice a lot on this side of the forum is a whole lot of for certain advice given out by some who you find out later are getting ready to run their first hunt test or FT or whatever... Just because someone has years of experience on a keyboard doesn't always translate to to dog training. Not saying this is you..


Agree. Offer the advice and leave it at that. Wayne has offered good solutions as have others.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Trained my first dog with A "Guague" type program, dog turned out alright until we got to Masters, then had to go back and fix up a few things. Namely I didn't know how to use the collar and my CC was very poor, if non-existent. Who would've thought that little book that came with the collar and it's section of proper stimulation levels didn't tell you everything . Best Advice I could give, is find an experienced trainer with dogs that you like, ask him to mentor you on a progression of the important steps and how he/she trains them. A mentor will save you so much time when you run into problems, because he can actually look at _your_ dog. Also it's nice to have someone explain the actual purpose behind of all these steps/drills and how they retain to _*your*_ dog, rather than it being part of the program or that's not how they did it on the DVD. In the end any program ends up being tailored to the particular needs of a dog and trainer, whether you actually follow a formalized program, or just shoot from the hip. Shooting from the hip can absolutely work, only it is nice to have an experienced person to fall back on, when issues popup. I will also say having that experienced person from the beginning rather than later, saves a lot of time, finding causes for issues.


----------



## Jerry Beil (Feb 8, 2011)

I suppose I don't understand the reason for the original post then.

Pretty much, Guage123 (of unknown - to the RTF community at least - training experience) is going to cobble together parts of different training programs together based on his feelings of how none of the programs is going to work for his dog because the dog is special in some unspecified way.

What kind of feedback did you want GAUGE123, because obviously what you got isn't what you were looking for.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Dang Jerry Bell.
That typing is swell.
A deep thought.
Like a coin ina well.



Edit - I know I know 5-7-5-7-5 .... not 3-5-3-5....it's not technically a Haiku, if entered it for a poetry competition or something, it would most likely be disqualified
and I know in a is two words, I plead poetic lisense.;-)


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Ken Bora said:


> Dang Jerry Bell.
> That typing is swell.
> A deep thought.
> Like a coin ina well.
> ...


Could this be "iambic pentameter???"


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Now I know you must be part Navajo. This is real code talk!


----------



## Jerry Beil (Feb 8, 2011)

The dog of Bora
Has a coat the color of 
Boiled xylem sap
Of the Acer Saccharum
With a butter pat

I can do the math and I can count syllables (I think)... there's just no art to my poetry. Do they have to rhyme?


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Jerry Beil said:


> The dog of Bora
> Has a coat the color of
> Boiled *xylem* sap
> Of the Acer Saccharum
> ...


Perhaps it was* phloem????*


----------



## BlaineT (Jul 17, 2010)

sounds like a convoluted mess. seems everyone new has a dog that's the "exception" to age old practices that have been proven to work. Yeah maybe there are some slight tweaks you have to make from time to time, but generally speaking they just work.
know a guy that did the same thing with his boykin. never trained a retriever, but didn't like anyone's full program so came up with own puppy program and ideas and mismatched stuff.


----------



## Jerry Beil (Feb 8, 2011)

Ugh. I think it's 5-7-5 anyway...

for a Haiku that is.

Once upon a time
The sap rose up the Maple
Xylem not phloem


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Jerry Beil said:


> Ugh. I think it's 5-7-5 anyway...
> 
> for a Haiku that is.
> 
> ...


Though the phloem distributes the sugar..............


----------



## Jerry Beil (Feb 8, 2011)

Xylem, phloem, phloem, xylem...

I'm designing my own process for making maple syrup. I've never made it before, but my pancakes are special and I don't think the way Ken does it will work for them.

Sorry, I kid - I couldn't resist though, no disrespect intended.


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Jerry Beil said:


> Xylem, phloem, phloem, xylem...
> 
> I'm designing my own process for making maple syrup. I've never made it before, but my pancakes are special and I don't think the way Ken does it will work for them.
> 
> Sorry, I kid - I couldn't resist though, no disrespect intended.


I am just teasing as well.
The confusion fits the thread well, does it not??


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

I've had the pleasure over the last few years to work with a large number of trainers in both retrievers and other sports. There's one thing in common with the best and most accomplished in those groups... They have their basic program (which may or may not look like the published material), but they are first and foremost problem solvers. These are people that just know dogs. They run into a problem and come up with a solution. They don't go look at the DVD for an answer, or come to an internet forum. They have enough understanding of dogs in general to dream up their own solution an create successful training. 

You'll never hear me chastise anyone for experimenting. I do it every day with the dogs I train. Seeing a variety of breeds and backgrounds from puppies to 7 year old rescue dogs will open your eyes, make you think and when you add the owners to it, drive you to come up with some very creative solutions to every day problems.

I never thought I would ever clip a leash to the front of a harness to get a dog to walk right, but when the owner refuses to use a collar of any sort, you have to come up with a solution. I didn't dream that solution up, there's an actual harness designed that way, but the 65 year old lady with the willful 40 lb dog needed help, so I showed her where to clip the leash and how to use her hip to create leverage and turn the dog. One lesson, problem solved. Sure as heck not what I would have done if given unlimited choices, but I didn't have unlimited choices. I used to think those harnesses were bandaids on brain surgery, and I still do, but it helped my customer and that's my job.

There's really no single program that's going to fit every dog and every owner that choose to try it. Most of us know that, so... why ridicule a guy whose doing his own thing? Only he and his dog will be effected by the results.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

DarrinGreene said:


> I've had the pleasure over the last few years to work with a large number of trainers in both retrievers and other sports. There's one thing in common with the best and most accomplished in those groups... They have their basic program (which may or may not look like the published material), but they are first and foremost problem solvers. These are people that just know dogs. They run into a problem and come up with a solution. They don't go look at the DVD for an answer, or come to an internet forum. They have enough understanding of dogs in general to dream up their own solution an create successful training.
> 
> You'll never hear me chastise anyone for experimenting. I do it every day with the dogs I train. Seeing a variety of breeds and backgrounds from puppies to 7 year old rescue dogs will open your eyes, make you think and when you add the owners to it, drive you to come up with some very creative solutions to every day problems.
> 
> ...


Bingo... Good post.


----------



## Jerry Beil (Feb 8, 2011)

Experience DarrinGreene is the key. The 65 year old lady wasn't able to figure out her own solution to controlling her dog. She felt that the standard program (using a collar) wasn't suitable for her dog. She apparently wasn't able to solve this problem on her own by coming up with a successful alternative, so she turned to you.

With your experience, you were able to creatively come up with a successful training solution.

It is unclear if the OP has that kind of experience - one of the first replies asked about that.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Jerry Beil said:


> Experience DarrinGreene is the key. The 65 year old lady wasn't able to figure out her own solution to controlling her dog. She felt that the standard program (using a collar) wasn't suitable for her dog. She apparently wasn't able to solve this problem on her own by coming up with a successful alternative, so she turned to you.
> 
> With your experience, you were able to creatively come up with a successful training solution.
> 
> It is unclear if the OP has that kind of experience - one of the first replies asked about that.


Agreed. We get experience through our successes and also our failures, just like our dogs. I got into all this stuff, including a new career because I screwed up a retriever and turned to a field trial training group for help. Poor dog gets an extra hug every day because of what I did to her years ago. Can't believe she doesn't crap in my lap every day.

Let the man experiment. He'll screw up in some areas and succeed in others and he'll learn what works and doesn't. I've had the good fortune to handle and train a ton of dogs the last couple of years. It's an experience most amateur trainers will never have, and one that I wouldn't have had, if it were not for taking a massive pay cut and moving 500 miles from home to chase a dream.


----------

