# "Back" or "Name" to Send on a Mark?



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

I've gotten mixed input from what I've read so I thought I'd just ask myself. I see some people use "back" to send a dog on a mark, others only use it for a blind and use the dog's name to send on a mark. We are following Hillmann and I believe that Bill uses "back" with the pups in his video.

Is there any right or wrong? I've read enough to be confused but need to make a decision and stick with it since we are getting into it now in training.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Say you got your 2 dogs in the duck blind with you. You shoot a duck, and now its time for one of the dogs to retrieve it. Which one's gonna go when you say "back"?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

mitty said:


> Sag you got your 2 dogs in the duck blind with you. You shoot a duck, and now its time for one of the dogs to retrieve it. Which one's gonna go when you say "back"?


The one with your hand over his head.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

No right or wrong but using back for blinds & name for marks is more common in the HT & FT games than using back on both. It's one more thing the handler can do to communicate with the dog. When I say back, my dogs know that I'm driving, when I call their name, they know they are on their own. This is a benefit IMO.


----------



## sunnydee (Oct 15, 2009)

Whether you are hunting in a duck blind or running your dog in competitions being a team player will greatly improve your chances of success. As one half of the team it is your job to teach your dog certain cue words that will help them understand what you want them to do. Here is an example, and you could see this example while hunting or in competition. You see three ducks coming into your decoys and you might cue your dog by saying mark letting him know to get ready. It's a good day so you knock all three of them down, two of them are stone dead right out in front of you and the third one landed in the tules on the other side of the pond and could be paddling away. If you don't get the one in the tules first you could lose it forever. Your dog is now concentrating on one of the ducks right out in front of him and you want him to refocus on the duck he can't see. You might re-heel him to help break his concentration and then cue him by saying (dead bird), that is letting him know that you are wanting him to run a blind. You send him on the word (back) which again let him know what you want him to do. As he is coming back with the blind retrieve you might cue him by using the words (where's your mark) and then sending him on his name, you have now told him in two different ways that you want him now to pick up the marks. The better that you and your dog can learn to communicate with each other the better team you're going to be.


----------



## Cass (Sep 17, 2013)

Name = mark
Back = blind


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

I've changed the way I work names and "back". 

For the last ten years or so I've been picking up with two, three or four dogs on big driven shoots; by big I mean anything up to six hundred bird days. Multiplying two, three or four x six hundred x Murphy's Constant gives a lot of opportunities for things to go wrong and sometimes they have, the name command being one of them.  because of the potential for confusion, bearing in mind the dogs aren't always by my side but could be 20 yards away, I now use the name simply as an attention getter

Typical situation ........ there are a couple of dead birds lying sixty yards to our front that the dog(s) have marked, but a pricked bird well out to our right, not marked by the dogs has pitched into cover well behind us; that's the one we want. If I use the dogs name as a send out command, I'm going to get the dead birds retrieved, and allow the cripple to move on. I need to get the attention of one of them, turn him through 120 degrees and give the blind command. So now it's "Jack", to get his attention and leave the other dog(s) where they are, "here," come to the cast off position, and "fetch it" for taking a blind.

I find this way I get fewer false starts than the way I did things previously using the conventional system.

If working multiple Mutts on multiple falls isn't on your particular horizon, then convention is fine; if it is however it's worth a ponderisation.

Eug


----------



## hotel4dogs (Aug 2, 2010)

Eug, those of us who do other competitive dog sports pretty much always use the name as an attention getter, preceding the actual command. Hence, in field we tend to send on a command like "take it" etc. rather than on the name.


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

If you always send on back- no one really has any idea what dog you are running at any given moment... Which in a certain context could be perceived as an advantage....

Some top competitors always send on back. Rational being that it helps avoid no-go's- and there are other cues that let the dog know if they are runnin a mark or a blind


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

I'm thinking of using the command 'Scooby Do' when sending the dog ? Just to be different 
Seriously , it shouldn't matter what command/release word is used in whatever situation as long as the dog or (dog's) understand what you are conveying.

Eug , rightly relates to a situation I am familiar with and if that works then fine.

In competition working in a 'Brace' situation with two handlers and a dog with each handler standing side by side which is often the case in our games. If each dog has been trained to be released on a mark with the command 'back' then that could result in a race ..or the very worst ...elimination ! 
Therefore Captainjack's post #3 is very relevant !.It may have been 'Tongue in cheek' comment, But in the situation or situations with those in the field working multiple dogs under a single handler it also adds an additional part of a process that each dog relates to ( It) ..Or Not.


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

Seems like the opinions are mixed on this which is pretty much what I gathered from my reading here.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

MNHunter said:


> Seems like the opinions are mixed on this which is pretty much what I gathered from my reading here.


Ask 3 Trainers a question and guaranteed 2 of them will say 1 of them is wrong


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Here's my two cents worth, Mr MNHunter.Spend it wisely
From the posts Ive seen from you, you need to find yourself a trainer, a good friend that knows his stuff, or just get a good book/DVD and go with it. When you start asking open ended questions on a site like this you will get a lot of good, not so good and some worthless information. You have people here that are expert FT trainers, to some that are casual show dog participants, all with a diferent MO, and agenda. What's your agenda, figure it out and stick with it. You sound young enough that you'll have other dogs, learn from the experience and enjoy. 
The common command in the retriever game is to send on a marked fall with your dog's name. The one he did not see, use a cue like Dead Bird, I use "Bird Down" hey try "Scooby Doo" it's all good (by the way that was my first labs name in 1984) when the dog is focused on the picture (whole new lesson here) send him on BACK.
Take my advice and get one person's help, even your club is going to confuse you. TOO MANY EXPERTS


----------



## BlaineT (Jul 17, 2010)

hotel4dogs said:


> Eug, those of us who do other competitive dog sports pretty much always use the name as an attention getter, preceding the actual command. Hence, in field we tend to send on a command like "take it" etc. rather than on the name.


had a nice lady bring a couple of her goldens to the tech pond one day. I think she was trying to work on her WC. Not even sure what that means but she sent her dogs on marks with "take it". Never heard it before then and now again in your post. Is this a Golden thing? or a show thing when trying to venture into the field world? One of her dogs did real nice work.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

polmaise said:


> I'm thinking of using the command 'Scooby Do' when sending the dog ? Just to be different
> *Seriously , it shouldn't matter what command/release word is used in whatever situation as long as the dog or (dog's) understand what you are conveying.*
> 
> I agree.
> Our dogs that we try to know so much about ...know us when we pick them up.


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

Terry Marshall said:


> Here's my two cents worth, Mr MNHunter.Spend it wisely
> From the posts Ive seen from you, you need to find yourself a trainer, a good friend that knows his stuff, or just get a good book/DVD and go with it. When you start asking open ended questions on a site like this you will get a lot of good, not so good and some worthless information. You have people here that are expert FT trainers, to some that are casual show dog participants, all with a diferent MO, and agenda. What's your agenda, figure it out and stick with it. You sound young enough that you'll have other dogs, learn from the experience and enjoy.
> The common command in the retriever game is to send on a marked fall with your dog's name. The one he did not see, use a cue like Dead Bird, I use "Bird Down" hey try "Scooby Doo" it's all good (by the way that was my first labs name in 1984) when the dog is focused on the picture (whole new lesson here) send him on BACK.
> Take my advice and get one person's help, even your club is going to confuse you. TOO MANY EXPERTS


Post deleted for discretion...


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

MNHunter said:


> Post deleted for discretion...


Deleted for discretion? It's probable the best post here. Like he said, when you ask open ended questions like this you get 15 different responses. You can't train a dog effectively by asking the brain trust that is RTF every step of the way. You need a program and a method. Finding someone near you and/or a dvd program will do that.


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

Lets say you are doing marks at a FT or HT with a honor. I am sure the handler of the honor dog does not want you to be using back as a command.


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

BlaineT said:


> had a nice lady bring a couple of her goldens to the tech pond one day. I think she was trying to work on her WC. Not even sure what that means but she sent her dogs on marks with "take it". Never heard it before then and now again in your post. Is this a Golden thing? or a show thing when trying to venture into the field world? One of her dogs did real nice work.


I think "take it" is a obedience thing. WC and WCX are working titles for goldens. I think Flatcoats Poodles and maybe Chessies can also get those titles. Usually when the take it command is given it would be used similar to fetch


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

I have also used back when the dog may not have seen the bird go down at a trial as a last ditch effort. If your dog is running blinds well you can at least line them in the direction and hope scent and other lues kick in.


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

Steve Amrein said:


> Lets say you are doing marks at a FT or HT with a honor. I am sure the handler of the honor dog does not want you to be using back as a command.


If a dog won't honor when someone 10 feet away says "back" I doubt the odds are a whole lot better with them saying "fido" or "dollar" or "17" either


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

The convention is to use the dog's name for marks and "back" for blinds. Dog is supposed to go whether you say "back" or its name so it is all about cueing the dog. Why Hillmann does things differently (which he does according to the OP) is maybe the real question.


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

jhnnythndr said:


> If a dog won't honor when someone 10 feet away says "back" I doubt the odds are a whole lot better with them saying "fido" or "dollar" or "17" either



I hate to disagree but, I would be big money that if you lined up a bunch of trial dogs and MH dogs and and had stuff going on in the field with guns and birds and someone behind or along side yells back 1/2 or more are going to go. When I say back my dogs had better go somewhere.


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

If you say back- my dog better sit. They know the difference between the handler and the other stuff. If you just line up a truck full and have someone stand behind them and yell back- sure who knows what they would do- but that's not an honor- they've seen an honor before- and it doesn't blow there mind to hear all manner of things from the line. Not like I have anything special, but we
Have got that sorted out


----------



## Don Lietzau (Jan 8, 2011)

I run 3 to 5 dogs at a time. All from "Down" position or directly off the field search. My commands start with a specific dog's name, then the command I wish that particular dog to follow. 

"Josey, Dead Bird, Josey and she goes. 
"Klous, Over, Klous" 
I maintain the actual verbal command word is of ZERO importance as long as the handler and dog understand.
Don and Crew


----------



## Dan Storts (Apr 19, 2011)

jhnnythndr said:


> If you say back- my dog better sit. They know the difference between the handler and the other stuff. If you just line up a truck full and have someone stand behind them and yell back- sure who knows what they would do- but that's not an honor- they've seen an honor before- and it doesn't blow there mind to hear all manner of things from the line. Not like I have anything special, but we
> Have got that sorted out


When your on honor and the running dog has to be re-heeled. The running dog handler is saying, "heel, heel, heel, heel". Does your dog go and heel beside him? NOPE! This is right in line with the thinking of him using the "back" command and making their dog break.


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Maybe I missed something but in an AKC hunt test (the only ones I run) the honor dog is always excused once the marks are on the ground. I have never seen a test where the judges would ask a dog to honor another being sent on a blind, for the reasons mentioned above. If I'm not mistaken it's against the rules.
In a hunting scenareo with multiple dogs the solution would be to have the other dog owners control their dogs as you work the blind.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Terry Marshall said:


> In a hunting scenareo with multiple dogs the solution would be to have the other dog owners control their dogs as you work the blind.


That would be nice ? But if the other handlers are in blinds or out of sight ? Who get's the cripple that many have seen?. Radio's? lol
What?..Who decides who or which dog is handled /worked for the blind? ..Just saying


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Awh now laddy your talking a foreign langage. But I could train to that scenario as well #commom sense


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Daren Galloway said:


> Deleted for discretion? It's probable the best post here. Like he said, when you ask open ended questions like this you get 15 different responses. You can't train a dog effectively by asking the brain trust that is RTF every step of the way. *You need a program and a method. Finding someone near you* and/or a dvd program will do that.


 I agree.
Find someone who is using a program and understands dogs.
Those who understand dogs will be able to train said dogs.


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

BJGatley said:


> I agree.
> Find someone who is using a program and understands dogs.
> Those who understand dogs will be able to train said dogs.


I understand dogs and our training is going very well. If my questions are upsetting you then you have option to simply not click on the thread and/or not post a reply. I have a program, Hillmann, and a method, Hillmann. Even though he does a fantastic job outlining his program and his methods, questions still arise from time to time and when they do I ask, filter through the responses and decide what I think will help me. For instance, Hillmann doesn't really get into leash training (heel) too much but I saw a post earlier about working on 'heel' and it helped immensely.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

MNHunter said:


> *I understand dogs* and our training is going very well. If my questions are upsetting you then you have option to simply not click on the thread and/or not post a reply. I have a program, Hillmann, and a method, Hillmann. Even though he does a fantastic job outlining his program and his methods, questions still arise from time to time and when they do I ask, filter through the responses and decide what I think will help me. For instance, Hillmann doesn't really get into leash training (heel) too much but I saw a post earlier about working on 'heel' and it helped immensely.


No you don't.
You only think you do....


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

jhnnythndr said:


> If you say back- my dog better sit. They know the difference between the handler and the other stuff. If you just line up a truck full and have someone stand behind them and yell back- sure who knows what they would do- but that's not an honor- they've seen an honor before- and it doesn't blow there mind to hear all manner of things from the line. Not like I have anything special, but we
> Have got that sorted out



Well then that settles it. I guess we should just cancel the honor since dogs never break.......


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

actually...




jhnnythndr said:


> If a dog won't honor when someone 10 feet away says "back" I doubt the odds are a whole lot better with them saying "fido" or "dollar" or "17" either




Probably should keep the honor, some dogs aren't trained...


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

MN, Hillman only goes so far. And you will have to transition to another program. I would suggest you think in advance some and go ahead and buy TRT by Mike Lardy. If you can't afford the dvds right now buy his booklet of Retriever Journal articles Vol. I. It is only $30. This volume covers the basics and it will answer many of your questions.
Hope this helps.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

In akc the honor dog is excused after the working dog is sent for the go bird. A question is if the working dog is sent on "back" would the honor dog go also. If the honor dog was similarly trained to go for marks on back.

I think this is a very rare combination. I have my dogs honor when I run another dog on blinds. It shouldn't cause a problem as many have mentioned but never the less I use dogs name for marks (if can remember his name, lol) and back for blinds.
I now write my working dogs name in ink across my left thumb because while running multiple dogs in a ht I have actually sent a dog on the wrong name. It happens.

I have also encountered dogs with the same call name and it hasn't caused a problem.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Wayne Nutt said:


> I have also encountered dogs with the same call name and it hasn't caused a problem.


I have seen the same or similar call name cause problems but usually it is okay. Honor dog is sitting there with handler having given cues that dog is not to retrieve and standing facing the dog instead of the marks. If the honor dog breaks it is probably not because the working dog handler said his name or something like it--it knows its handler didn't say go. He was probably going to break anyway.

Still it can be a concern in the running order and the marshall should accommodate it. Also had the a handler with a name close to "dog" ask the judges to use the dog number just in case. That one seems a bigger deal to me, since the voice is going to be closer.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

DH, Exactly. Marshal can adjust if owner has a concern.


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

Wayne Nutt said:


> MN, Hillman only goes so far. And you will have to transition to another program. I would suggest you think in advance some and go ahead and buy TRT by Mike Lardy. If you can't afford the dvds right now buy his booklet of Retriever Journal articles Vol. I. It is only $30. This volume covers the basics and it will answer many of your questions.
> Hope this helps.


Thanks for the advice, I have thought about transitioning to TRT at some point if I decide to go away from the more advanced Hillmann training. Does TRT start from puppy basics? or does it start after some level of OB has been trained?


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

TRT starts with basic ob when dog is about six mo. old. You can do a search under my name for Rowdy (by Pirate) and find a log of his yard work milestones. You can also find videos of him doing: Mertens, Hillman and then switching to Lardy.
It is a good idea to buy the booklets, especially vol I, along with dvds.


----------



## Jwattsmojo (Jul 15, 2013)

My opinion is back is cue for your under my control run straight fight factors and be ready for a whistle. Sayin his name its his job to dig the bird out and my dogs undersand that difference i promise u. Just my input


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

jhnnythndr said:


> actually...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lots of people with handles and opinions sounding like they have probably never really run a dog in upper competition because most dogs that never break are those that haven't broken yet. There aren't too many in FT who use back for marks and blinds.


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

Oh my god. I already posted I haven't got anything special. In this thread. I can't even believe that I'm having this conversation right now. 

Let me ask you- if someone is worried that there dog is going to break in the honor because the working dogs handler sends on back- would you consider that to be an adequately trained dog? Yes, sure they will all break- but in your experience are the handlers at the upper levels of competition, or even testing concerned that there dog will break honor if the working dog handler releases for marks on "back"

thwre are not too many in ft who send for marks on back. I agree. I only know of 1 firsthand and another 2nd hand. 


Go reread my posts on this- and if you think I'm off base- report them to Chris.


Addendum: my gundog won't break because another handler releases there dog. My gundog. We aren't talkin about a real high standard at this point. get a grip. Now maybe I'm wrong about "steadiness" being as I am only a new student to the game I am sbsokutley prepared to accept that in upper levels of competition and testing a far lesser degree of steadiness and control might be acceptable, so if that's the case, just let me know- if- in your experience, Nancy, handlers and trainers consider a break due to another handlers release to be "just one of those things"- in fact no need to speak for anyone else, do you personally find that to be acceptable, or excusable in your own dogs?


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

ErinsEdge said:


> Lots of people with handles and opinions sounding like they have probably never really run a dog in upper competition because most dogs that never break are those that haven't broken yet. There aren't too many in FT who use back for marks and blinds.





In fact- here...

Though I lack experience handling at the upper levels of competition and testing, I believe that a generally greater degree of steadiness is typically called for than a dog that breaks on honor because the working dogs handler releases the working dog- even if he says "back"- 
Nancy, your derision makes it plain your opinion is different- please elaborate. 

Thanks.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

The reason Bill Hillmann uses "back" is because he feels it is the perfect, strong word that conveys to *his* dogs what he wants. It is a personal choice with his own rationale. I picked that thought up from a friend and well versed Hillmann mentor.

I often train more than one dog at a time. Nothing is etched in stone.

The release choice of the call name vs. using "back" has very little to do with the overall philosophy of his program. For example, I use a placeboard for teaching "send backs" vs. Hillmann using half of a crate. So?

My regular question when working the program is "Does what I'm doing fit the basic philosophy?" I have effective "skill sessions" that were done with my other dogs. I will continue to teach those if they fit. Training is not a rigid mold.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

KwickLabs said:


> The reason Bill Hillmann uses "back" is because he feels it is the perfect, strong word that conveys to *his* dogs what he wants. It is a personal choice with his own rationale. I picked that thought up from a friend and well versed Hillmann mentor.
> 
> I often train more than one dog at a time. Nothing is etched in stone.
> 
> ...


Thanks, Kwick.

I wonder how many dogs really know the difference between "back" and its name.


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

jhnnythndr said:


> In fact- here...
> 
> Though I lack experience handling at the upper levels of competition and testing, I believe that a generally greater degree of steadiness is typically called for than a dog that breaks on honor because the working dogs handler releases the working dog- even if he says "back"-
> Nancy, your derision makes it plain your opinion is different- please elaborate.
> ...


I have seen AFC-FC- MH and even a NFC "break" while on honor These dogs are at the height of the game. Maybe they were never trained to honor or sit........ BTW these dogs are also sent on their names. The reason is that this system works. Let us know when you have titled a dog that goes on marks on back.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Steve Amrein said:


> I have seen AFC-FC- MH and even a NFC "break" while on honor These dogs are at the height of the game. Maybe they were never trained to honor or sit........ BTW these dogs are also sent on their names. The reason is that this system works. Let us know when you have titled a dog that goes on marks on back.


Define Title!


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

mitty said:


> Thanks, Kwick.
> 
> I wonder how many dogs really know the difference between "back" and its name.


i found out that mine does! I had been talking with group members about how to correct a "no go" and had the sequence "back nick back" stuck in my head. The next time I went to the line for marks, "back" just popped out of my mouth. My dog looked up at me like I was crazy, I called his name correctly and off he went to do a fine job!

and Mr Thunder, if you get your gun dogs up to "top level competition" and they never break, I think we are talking oxymoron here. No top level dogs get there without tremendous drive. And that includes the occasional break!


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

*First,* if you properly socialize a dog, it does recognize its name. However, I have seen plenty of dogs raised in the kennel that have no idea that they have a name.

*Second,* this idea that the well trained dog never breaks is silly. If you are around dogs enough, whatever you once thought would never happen will happen. 

My dog, FC/AFC Freeridin Wowie Zowie, who was a finalist in the 2003 National Amateur Retriever Championship, broke on a boring duck flyer 150 yards away - when he was 10. I was so stunned that by the time I got my whistle in my mouth, Zowie had the bird. It was the first and only time he broke. But, he broke and he was very well trained. 

*Third*, I use my dog's name for marks and back for blinds. In today's Open All Age competitions, you often see interrupted marks. That is, a set of marks is thrown, and before you pick up the marks, you run a blind - usually on a line very tight to one of the marks. Alternatively, you often see a poison bird blind. That is, a mark is thrown and a blind is run very tight to the mark and/or gunner. In both of these situations, I want the dog to know when we are running a blind (much more disciplined attitude) and when we are running a mark (looser attitude). On a retired short bird in particular, I want my dog relaxed and thinking mark. On a nasty poison bird, I want my dog a little bit nervous and thinking blind. If you use "back" for marks and blinds, you lose that flexibility.


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

Ted Shih said:


> *First,* if you properly socialize a dog, it does recognize its name. However, I have seen plenty of dogs raised in the kennel that have no idea that they have a name.
> 
> *Second,* this idea that the well trained dog never breaks is silly. If you are around dogs enough, whatever you once thought would never happen will happen.
> 
> ...


Excellent post, thank you!


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

Steve Amrein said:


> Lets say you are doing marks at a FT or HT with a honor. I am sure the handler of the honor dog does not want you to be using back as a command.


This is what I first replied to. 

This to me reads like a description of a dog that's not adequately trained. If a handler is worried his dog is going to break honor for a specific reason- he lacks confidence in his dogs ........... Training. 

Dogs being dogs is one thing- ^^^^ that up there isn't describing a dog being a dog to me so much as its describing a dog that somebody didn't get ready. 

one thing I've noticed both at trials and in training that I've attended is that the handlers that are most competitive aren't concerned with anything except the dog they are running. They don't seem worried about other dogs, or handlers, and what they might do. I suppose just because it's so far outside there span of control.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

When to use name vs when to use back. Answer it depends. Realistically you can teach a dog to go on anything. The standard however is to teach a dog a different command for when they are in Responsible for retrieve (name = mark), and when the dogs needs to follow the handler directions (blinds=back). Now there's skills that can be utilized with a handler for using a back command on particular marks. Back is setup as telling the dog to run striaght back. You can use it on marks rather than the dog name; when you need a bit more control over the mark, or when the dog is lacking confidence in a mark. Ex dog didn't get a good mark, or doesn't remeber. line the dog up and send him on back, he'll take off with confidence and sometimes figure it out without handling. Ex:2 you have a shoreline mark and need the dog to take the water; line him to the mark directly to the water and send him on a stern back; gives you more control of his initial line to prevent cheating.

So why not just use back all the time? If back has been trained as a running a striaght line with no alteration, handler is responsible for all retrieves. Using the name gives the dog permission deivate from the line and permission to hunt; also makes the dog responsible for finding the birds by themselves. Marks are his job, not mine; I related that by using his name.


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

MooseGooser said:


> Define Title!



AFC FC NAFC NFC All age placements MH Master national qualifier HRC 500 point


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Steve Amrein said:


> AFC FC NAFC NFC All age placements MH Master national qualifier HRC 500 point


Hi Steve, I take it you got the cat FF'd already! 

Welcome back! 

P.S. I was glad to finally get to meet you in person at Paducah a while back.

Chris


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Steve Amrein said:


> AFC FC NAFC NFC All age placements MH Master national qualifier HRC 500 point


 Per your definition of "TITLE",,,
So ,what you are saying is a 200 point HRCH doesn't qualify,or a 7 pass master hunter?

Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

The only reason I ask,, is because ,in my signature line,, the HRCH,, SH dog named Bailey was trained to be sent on "back" on both marks and Blinds...

But as the way it seems to go on this board anymore,,Many dont feel those "Titles" mean much

Think how many birds that dog picked up in training to get those "TITLES" ,how well she had to understand her release in tests also.. She was a good marker,but a creepy hard drive dog,,but I only remember her breaking in 1 senior test!



Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

So think about a Hunt tester whos dog shows exceptional work. It marks really well,runs nice blinds,,good control. but sends on "back" on both Marks and blinds


Also lets agree that for a rule of thumb, when running your blinds, "Voice" casts should be kept to a minimal. Best practice is USUALLY silent casts with hand signals.

If we still agree,,, How many times in a Hunt test series MIGHT you use the word "Back"?

3 times when you send on the triple marks, and once on the blind! In both instances it means "GO"! to the dog.


----------



## Buck Mann (Apr 16, 2003)

Steve Amrein said:


> Let us know when you have titled a dog that goes on marks on back.


I send on "name" for marks and "back" for blinds like most other people. However, if you are consistent, I don't think it really matters that much. I used to train occasionally with a NAFC that was sent on "back" for marks and blinds. He had 84 derby points and ended up with 104 all-age points.

Buck


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> So why not just use back all the time? If back has been trained as a running a striaght line with no alteration, handler is responsible for all retrieves. Using the name gives the dog permission deivate from the line and permission to hunt; also makes the dog responsible for finding the birds by themselves. Marks are his job, not mine; I related that by using his name.


Most people view finding the marks as teamwork, and not just "where's your mark?" I think that's a big difference. You want to use as many tools as you can to dig out a tough mark so it's not all on the dog.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Isn't the "REAL" Que that You the handler is driving,,is when you blow that first whistle?

whether it be a mark or a blind?


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

MooseGooser said:


> Per your definition of "TITLE",,,
> So ,what you are saying is a 200 point HRCH doesn't qualify,or a 7 pass master hunter?
> 
> Gooser


Haha, that will do


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Hi Steve, I take it you got the cat FF'd already!
> 
> Welcome back!
> 
> ...




Good seeing you as well. I will post the Cat training vids when I achieve a title with them.  Congrats on the new Pup BTW I need to go back to Lurk mode as I dont think I can keep posting without getting Banned. Sorry I take my dog stuff so serious and I am not very peanutty. I also wish to go back to the old days which I know wont / cant return.


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

Buck Mann said:


> I send on "name" for marks and "back" for blinds like most other people. However, if you are consistent, I don't think it really matters that much. I used to train occasionally with a NAFC that was sent on "back" for marks and blinds. He had 84 derby points and ended up with 104 all-age points.
> 
> Buck


Not saying it hasn't been done. BTW What ques and how do you send on marks.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Steve Amrein said:


> Good seeing you as well. I will post the Cat training vids when I achieve a title with them.  Congrats on the new Pup BTW I need to go back to Lurk mode as I dont think I can keep posting without getting Banned. Sorry I take my dog stuff so serious and I am not very peanutty. I also wish to go back to the old days which I know wont / cant return.


So Steve,

Does this mean that you are not capable of posting on this resource without personal attacks?

I've been asking folks to use the Golden Rule on RTF since 1998. Just treat others the way you'd like to be treated. Just when are the "good old days" that you reference?

RTF was around for 6 years before you registered your 2004 account. 

The Peanut post that some like to gripe about was just one more way of expressing my request to :

Attack or debate the idea, or the concept. This is expected and totally possible without personal attacks.

That's it. 

Are you stating that you're incapable of posting without personally attacking someone? 

Again, let me be abundantly clear. Debate and disagreement is expected and is fine. Just please do it in a way that's not personally attacking - as that hateful stuff is not productive at all. 

Thanks, Chris


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Isn't the "REAL" Que that You the handler is driving,,is when you blow that first whistle?
> 
> whether it be a mark or a blind?



No. I don't think so. Not if you are communicating with your dog. If you and your dog are on the same page, it knows when it is being sent, whether it is being sent on a mark or a blind.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Isn't the "REAL" Que that You the handler is driving,,is when you blow that first whistle?
> 
> whether it be a mark or a blind?


I'd say maybe a dog that's in transition may not know.

I feel that an advanced dog definitely knows when he/she's been sent on a blind versus a mark. 

The dog that drives past the poison bird blind is a good example. If that dog made it that far, he probably can mark. So the fact that he did not pick up the poison bird is evidence that he knew who was driving.

Make sense?


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

Chris Atkinson said:


> So Steve,
> 
> Does this mean that you are not capable of posting on this resource without personal attacks?
> 
> ...


I thought I have been around here since 1999 but not of any real relevance. I can surely debate with anyone including Marvin. My problem is over the years telling someone they are wrong or is a dumb idea has become a personal attack. I only recognize a few names from back then. A lot have moved on or have been banned which is a shame because they have a lot to contribute to those who will listen. A lot of people dont know how to listen anymore. Back in the day when you were being a idiot someone told you. ( see good ole days) IMHO if that is whats needed, I feel you are doing the person a disservice not to tell them. Just like the portion of the sport I choose I came here to win and this is a serious thing to me. I also know my limitations and am not going to be arguing with Lardy over not needing to force fetch a dog or not. Folks better and smarter than myself have been doing this far longer and better than I. They are successful at it both monetarily and when the ribbons get handed out. The only portion of this game i look at are the results. That is the only method to truly measure success. Thats not to say the tiger woods placed 35th last weekend says he sucks at golf. 

I also understand that the RTF has moved from a hobby to a financial situation and needs change. I will still check in from time to time but will likely not contribute. See you at a trial some time.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Steve Amrein said:


> I thought I have been around here since 1999 but not of any real relevance. I can surely debate with anyone including Marvin. My problem is over the years telling someone they are wrong or is a dumb idea has become a personal attack. I only recognize a few names from back then. A lot have moved on or have been banned which is a shame because they have a lot to contribute to those who will listen. A lot of people dont know how to listen anymore. Back in the day when you were being a idiot someone told you. ( see good ole days) IMHO if that is whats needed, I feel you are doing the person a disservice not to tell them. Just like the portion of the sport I choose I came here to win and this is a serious thing to me. I also know my limitations and am not going to be arguing with Lardy over not needing to force fetch a dog or not. Folks better and smarter than myself have been doing this far longer and better than I. They are successful at it both monetarily and when the ribbons get handed out. The only portion of this game i look at are the results. That is the only method to truly measure success. Thats not to say the tiger woods placed 35th last weekend says he sucks at golf.
> 
> I also understand that the RTF has moved from a hobby to a financial situation and needs change. I will still check in from time to time but will likely not contribute. See you at a trial some time.


Steve, 

This is nonsense. It is as appropriate to tell someone that you think they're wrong today as it ever was.

The first person ever banned from RTF was Shayne Mehringer and it was in 1999. He was banned for calling someone an idiot.

Shayne and I worked through that and he came back on RTF. We agreed on how to properly use the resource.

The person most banned was John Fallon. He's deceased now, and once again, after ongoing discussion about requested moderation of the style he used, he was back. 

If you think that the users of RTF pay any less heed to advice given on this resource today than in the days of your memory, you're choosing to use a very selective memory. 

Things cycle. The internet is totally different today than it was in the 90s or early 2000s. Social media has taken on a whole new shape and presence. And that's a good thing. 

Every personality that has been banned from this resource had been asked repeatedly, politely and with dignity to please modify their behavior. Their accounts were only banned after they showed unwillingness to cooperate.

Some who claim on Facebook to be on "timeout" have created multiple alias accounts and generally played games that were unproductive and showed a lack of respect for my time in attempt to maintain a resource that's fair for all.

Steve, I don't know if you earn a living training dogs these days, nor do I recall if you ever did. But I sure as heck hope that you can remember from "the good old days", my ongoing efforts to maintain folks' right to not have defamatory posts made about them, that could jeopardize their repultation or livlihood.

If you want to waste your time complaining about RTF on other places on the net, that's fine. It's your time. 

If you want to try to pay it forward and help some folks, that's great. I'm confident you can do it without defamatory or hateful responses.

Your claims that it is inapproriate, or that anyone has ever been banned from this site for telling someone they're wrong are flat out incorrect. 

Every account that has been banned has been done so only after my efforts to politely ask those folks to cooperate. 

Some have communicated with me and agreed to cooperate and they're back - or they were before they passed away.

And yes, sadly, quite a few of our contributors have passed away.

Chris


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Wayne i too run 5-6 dogs on an honor for a water or land blind. I cue the dog i want and the others stay steady thru every cast. It's called training guys


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

2tall said:


> i found out that mine does! I had been talking with group members about how to correct a "no go" and had the sequence "back nick back" stuck in my head. The next time I went to the line for marks, "back" just popped out of my mouth. My dog looked up at me like I was crazy, I called his name correctly and off he went to do a fine job!
> 
> and Mr Thunder, if you get your gun dogs up to "top level competition" and they never break, I think we are talking oxymoron here. No top level dogs get there without tremendous drive. And that includes the occasional break!


Carol, If your dog has been trained to run a blind when you command "back" then dog is supposed to "go" when you say "back." So why didn't he "go" when you said "back"? I think you are describing a no-go. Your dog doesn't know that you screwed up and that there was no blind out there: he should have left to go find it.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I'd say maybe a dog that's in transition may not know.
> 
> I feel that an advanced dog definitely knows when he/she's been sent on a blind versus a mark.
> 
> ...


Dog should know it is being sent for a blind vs. a mark before you send it. 

Check.

So does what command handler uses to release Dog ("Rover" vs "Back") even register with Dog? Does "back" confirm to dog what it already knew, that it was going for a blind? 

So since it already knows it is going for a blind vs a mark before the send why even bother with the extra language? 

Hmmmm....


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Just to discuss:

A dog that Knows it is being sent on a Mark,, is because he has sat and watched a bird fall from the sky,and hit the ground.

A dog knows he is being sent on a Blind,,is because he hasnt seen a bird fall from the sky and hit the ground. He hasnt seen anything to "Mark"

If you throw a triple,and the dog clearly didnt see one of the falls,,,, In the DOGS mind, is that bird a mark or a blind when you send him?

You send him for that "Mark" that YOU saw,,but he didnt,, and right out of the gate, you realize you need to handle. You Blow that first whistle,,and IMHO,,that tells the dog "I am driving"

Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I make about every mistake a handler can make when running my dog. I am sure there are some here that dont make mistakes,, but I have to ask,, have any of you just got confused when running a blind,, and sent your dog on its name instead of "Back"? are you telling me he doesnt go? and if he does go,, he wont handle because he doesnt know you are driving?


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> Carol, If your dog has been trained to run a blind when you command "back" then dog is supposed to "go" when you say "back." So why didn't he "go" when you said "back"? I think you are describing a no-go. Your dog doesn't know that you screwed up and that there was no blind out there: he should have left to go find it


Mitty
If my dogs watched marks go down and I sent on back they would jump out ,stop and look at me,,,because there was no dead bird cue. It never goes down that way so its out of sync so the dogs show uncertainty. However if they watched the marks and I said dead bird,, they would move out on their new line,because that's the way it has always been done. I would not call it a no go ifmy dogs balked on "back" on a set of marks unless they were trained that way. I would just chalk it up to bad dog handling.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Pete said:


> Mitty
> If my dogs watched marks go down and I sent on back they would jump out ,stop and look at me,,,because there was no dead bird cue. It never goes down that way so its out of sync so the dogs show uncertainty. However if they watched the marks and I said dead bird,, they would move out on their new line,because that's the way it has always been done. I would not call it a no go ifmy dogs balked on "back" on a set of marks unless they were trained that way. I would just chalk it up to bad dog handling.


I introduced the "dead bird" cue long after dog learned to go on "back." During T and TT etc. dog learned it must go when I said "back" and the "dead bird" cue was added when i began pattern blinds. 

Why would the go-stop-come standard change just because the "dead bird" cue got added?

Since a no-go on a blind is a serious fault in tests and trials, my dog had better go when I say "back"! 

My dog had better go when I say "Anna" as well, even if she didn't see the mark. 

I am a poor handler, my dog has had to learn to deal with a lot!


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

I agree, if a dog is sent for a mark on it's name and didn't see anything, it must go anyway. A dog should be taught and *understand* the expectations of _go as sent_.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> Why would the go-stop-come standard change just because the "dead bird" cue got added?


Because dogs recognize when something is out of kilter,,and they don't have the reasoning to figure out what we meant.

I would agree Renee ,when you are running a blind possibly without even using a cue your dog better go on back. 
But when the expectation is marks and you spring a surprise command on him instead of a release ,,then I suppose some will go and some will question. I would think the dog with lots of training and understanding of his job would give you a double take at some
point between the line and the bird,,just to make sure you really meant to say that, It all depends how you train the dog. I personally expect my dogs to question me if that were to happen. It tells me there is some gray matter upstairs.
Pete


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Exactly Pete! I have indeed experienced "no-gos" when the dog watched the birds go down and failed to go on name when sent. But in the case I described, the accidental use of "back" created confusion as to whether he was released or not. As soon as I called his name, fine. The rules allow for no such "confusion" on blinds.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> Exactly Pete! I have indeed experienced "no-gos" when the dog watched the birds go down and failed to go on name when sent. But in the case I described, the accidental use of "back" created confusion as to whether he was released or not. As soon as I called his name, fine. The rules allow for no such "confusion" on blinds


Carol
Did you mean failed to go on the word back when expecting marks. I haven't experienced dogs eager to go on marks, then no go because I sent them on their name. But back yes. Brain fart on my part. 

Pete


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Sheesh. Why so hard to say plain English? It was a mark. I f'd up and said "back". Dog confused, did not go. I said his name, he went. My point is, a dog trained to release on marks with his name, does get confused if told back. I done here!


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

mitty said:


> Carol, If your dog has been trained to run a blind when you command "back" then dog is supposed to "go" when you say "back." So why didn't he "go" when you said "back"? I think you are describing a no-go. Your dog doesn't know that you screwed up and that there was no blind out there: he should have left to go find it.



If by no-go, you mean the dog did not go, yes it had a no-go. If you meant that the dog did something wrong, I disagree. 

Dogs are creatures of habit. We use that in our training. When we create a habit, then deviate from the habit, then if the dog fails to perform, it is - at least partially - on us.
If I say the dog's name too softly on a mark, and it does not go, it is on me.
If I say back before the dog is set and ready to go on a blind and startle it, it is on me.
I don't think it is necessarily on the dog if I say "back" and it does not respond.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Just to discuss:
> 
> A dog that Knows it is being sent on a Mark,, is because he has sat and watched a bird fall from the sky,and hit the ground.
> 
> ...


I disagree. 

Look at series 1/2 of the 2015 National Amateur. They shoot, a short bird. It retires. They shoot a flyer. You pick up one bird (they cannot dictate which bird and everyone seems to be picking up the flyer). Then you run a blind. After you complete the blind, you pick up the short mark.

So, you pick up the flyer.
You want a good blind. You "no" the dog off the short retired. Work to get the dog's attention on the line you want. When you get it, you cue "that's it" (see Voigt discussion) then you send with "back" (which the dogs associate with force or compulsion).
The dog returns, you want it relaxed for the short retired. So, unless you absolutely have to do so, you don't fuss with it. You let the dog settle into the mark, then send with its name.

If handlers did as you suggest, they would get poor initial lines on the blinds, poor momentum, and likely negative carryover to the short retired. 

Ted


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

So, a person starts out by sending his dog on Back for both marks and blinds.

He starts from the beginning by "queing" Marks with "Mark" then sends the dog on "back"

When the dog starts running blinds, he ques the dog with "dead" then sends the dog on "back"

Both times the dog has been given a "que" Both times the dog is sent on "back"

Dog understands that "back" means "Go"

If you are consistent with that method,, what difference does it make?

I used to send on "back"on both marks and Blinds.

The reason I changed was 
1. I spent hard earned money on a program lectured from hay bales

2. Peer Pressure.

Gooser


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

MooseGooser said:


> So, a person starts out by sending his dog on Back for both marks and blinds.
> 
> He starts from the beginning by "queing" Marks with "Mark" then sends the dog on "back"
> 
> ...


It's old school, but handler doesn't say a thing at the line, instead they use their body moment and dog follows the marks as they fall. Handler will also let the dog see the marks beforehand at the line.
After that the big dog knows what to do.
Blinds the same way...handler moves feet by slight push pull que until dog locks on and sees the picture. 

My penny worth. 

Edit: Forgot to add that this is in Field trials from past.
Edit one more time: Sorry folks...Marks are only thrown until handler raises their arm on each mark showing they are ready.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> So, a person starts out by sending his dog on Back for both marks and blinds.
> 
> He starts from the beginning by "queing" Marks with "Mark" then sends the dog on "back"
> 
> ...


Maybe you start by sending a dog for marks and blinds with back, I don't.
If doesn't make any difference, don't do it
If peer pressure is the reason you do things, well .....


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

MooseGooser said:


> So, a person starts out by sending his dog on Back for both marks and blinds.
> 
> He starts from the beginning by "queing" Marks with "Mark" then sends the dog on "back"
> 
> ...


How many Open or Amateur stakes has this person won?

How many Nationals has the guy giving the lecture won?

What percentage of the handlers winning field trials send on "back" for both marks and blinds?


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I personally know several people in th HT world that sent on Back for both Marks and Blinds. They were very successful HUNT TEST participants..

I was contacted by telephone a day or two ago from a very prominent persona on this board who stated several successful Field trial people with TITLES sent on back..

I am of the belief that the world doesnt revolve around FT's I have a Lot of respect to the talent of FT dogs and handlers,, but,,, There is a LOT of very talented dogs running Master/Finished tests..

My peer pressure was from people at HT that after they ran in the order either before or after me,,would go to the marshall at their next test,, and ask if they could be moved because I bellered "Back" when I sent my dog!  They didnt want to be anywhere near me when I ran. (embarrassing) so,, I changed 

There are still people that dont want to be near me in the running order to this day .. so.. I am guessing there are other reasons also... but I dont run that often so,, I dont ruin too many peoples day that much! 

A Hunt test Pro , very politely informed me of the problem people had running with me in the order.  I thought it kinda weird he was often the guy either running in front of me,, or on the honor at tests.!


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

The OP was asking what others thought of the practice of sending on Back!

I wonder if the overwhelming majority of responses in this thread would be some sort of pressure to help him make the decision?..

Someone taught ME to run in my beginning by sending on "Back" both marks and Blinds.... A LONG,,, LONG time ago!

I respect that person to this day.. He no longer runs HT's.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

MooseGooser said:


> I personally know several people in th HT world that sent on Back for both Marks and Blinds. They were very successful HUNT TEST participants..
> 
> I was contacted by telephone a day or two ago from a very prominent persona on this board who stated several successful Field trial people with TITLES sent on back..
> 
> ...


 I am really surprise that old school training is used in HTs. 
I can see that used in FTs, but not HTs. 
Ignorance is bliss on my part then.

Edit: The OP likes to listen to his voice.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Back to send on blinds, name to release for marks.

But I'm just a lowly gun dog trainer, so what do I know.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

MooseGooser said:


> The OP was asking what others thought of the practice of sending on Back!
> 
> I wonder if the overwhelming majority of responses in this thread would be some sort of pressure to help him make the decision?..
> 
> ...


A long-long time ago probably more people, both HT and FT, sent on back. The guy that we bought our first lab from used sit, back, here & give as his only commands. 

In a hunt test, kicking the dog off on a blind and handling with many whistles, or even handling on a mark (sometimes two) will usually get you a ribbon. Although your world does not revolve around FTs, handling on a mark rarely gets you called back and simply taking the casts given will many times not get you called back on blinds. The dogs and handler must be much more precise to have any success at all. 

The lecture from the hay bales mentioned something about using every fiber of your being to try to communicate with your dog. Sending on name for marks and back for blinds is simply one more method to enhance that communication. No one should feel pressured to change though. If your dogs are where you want them to be, keep doing what you're doing. If you are getting beat by handlers doing something differently, then maybe you'd want to look in to what those other folks are doing differently.


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

MooseGooser said:


> The OP was asking what others thought of the practice of sending on Back!
> 
> I wonder if the overwhelming majority of responses in this thread would be some sort of pressure to help him make the decision?..
> 
> ...


The reason that I asked is that Hillmann appeared to be using 'back' on marks whereas I'd seen many folks here using the dogs name. Based on the replies and reasoning laid out here, I've decided to use my pup's name on marks and intend to use 'back' on blinds if/when we get to that point. 

I appreciate the replies and opinions offered on the topic. Obviously there's no cut-and-dry answer as evidenced by the discussion that has taken place.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

MNHunter said:


> The reason that I asked is that Hillmann appeared to be using 'back' on marks whereas I'd seen many folks here using the dogs name. Based on the replies and reasoning laid out here, I've decided to use my pup's name on marks and intend to use 'back' on blinds if/when we get to that point.
> 
> I appreciate the replies and opinions offered on the topic. Obviously there's no cut-and-dry answer as evidenced by the discussion that has taken place.


Good answer grasshopper. :mrgreen:


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I don't believe you should do something just because Lardy or Farmer does.
I don't believe you should do something because you want to get along with your peers.
I don't believe you should do something because someone says some person called on the telephone to tell you people who may have titled dogs do
I don't believe you should do something because someone a long time ago told you to do it that way

I think you should do things because there is a rational reason for doing so.
Thus, far no one has given me a reason to believe that it is better to use "back" for marks and blinds. 
And a number of people have given me a reason to believe that it is better to use a dog's name for "marks" and "back" for blinds.


----------



## canuckkiller (Apr 16, 2009)

*Nilo Duck Shoot*

Hi Mitty -

You are not in the boat with your two dogs. You are at Nilo Farms, standing next to T. W. 'Cotton'
Pershall and three or four of Mr. Olin's Labs staunched & ready at a typical Nilo 'Duck Shoot' for invited Guests.

On que, ducks are released from the tower, they head to water past the shooters. When the ducks are down, 
T. W. calls the dog he wants to retrieve. Commands are: "Charger", "Back"! Only Charger leaves the line, retrieves
his bird and delivers to hand, then returns to his place. Each dog gets his turn until the string of shot ducks are
picked up.If you were there, you were watching a Master Trainer plying his artful trade.

That's the way T. W. handled his retrievers; at the Nilo duck shoots, in training, at a field trial or off the
Quail Wagon at Albany, GA.

It was: "preparatory command; command of execution". 

Bill Connor


----------



## MNHunter (Feb 16, 2015)

Ted Shih said:


> Thus, far no one has given me a reason to believe that it is better to use "back" for marks and blinds.
> And a number of people have given me a reason to believe that it is better to use a dog's name for "marks" and "back" for blinds.


Just to play Devil's Advocate for the sake of the discussion, I can think of reasons and scenarios (I believe) where it might be advantageous to use something other than the dog's name for marks. One reason, which was suggested to me, was just for the sake of keeping it simple. In the end, it should achieve the same result.

Another reason, at least in my mind, is the opportunity to get the specific dog's attention with a mark on the ground from a position other than by his side. The ability to say his name, followed by a command, with a dead duck laying on the water seems like it might be a handy tool at times. Especially when there are multiple dog's along on the same waterfowl hunt.

Suppose you're duck hunting over water. you've got two different dogs seated on shore and you are 20 feet away in a blind. Two ducks are shot down out front and both dogs see them. More birds are coming but from a different direction where the dogs can't see them approaching. You want to call one of the dogs over to you to face that direction while leaving the two ducks laying in the decoys for a bit longer. How do you do so without sending him crashing into the water and then rerouting with a whistle or command?

Or, in the same scenario, the birds both fall and you're not sure if the dog's have seen them. You want to send one of them on "back" since it might be a blind retrieve. How do you tell only one of them without walking over to their side if you can't say their name?

Edit #1(like I said, just for arguments sake. I've already decided to use name for marks. I am curious how these types of situ's would be handled though)

Edit #2 (looks like Canukkiller said basically the same thing before me)


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I have sat on a river bank in 6 degree temperatures hunting with a DAWG. 
I have dropped ducks at 35 yrds in the decoys in front of me. 

I needed a dog to sit still,watch as best he could,and go when I sent him.

He needed to sit when I blew a whistle, and take simple casts to birds he did not see fall.

If I needed a TITLE to describe that dog, I suppose it would be a Senior/Seasoned level dog.

I spent many PLEASURABLE days with dogs like this!
I never knew about the nuances of FT handling.

I discovered the HUNT TEST program,and people made suggestions to me about how to correct the things they thought,I did wrong.
I have tried to listen and become better,, But How I miss those simple days with simple dogs,,, that HUNTED.

One of those dogs was sent on "Back" when picking up both Marks and Blinds. Shee was a Joy to hunt with. She didnt know or care I didnt send her on her name. She became a Finished HRC dog with about 200 or so points, with a Senior AKC Title. She didnt know anything about that either,, She just loved to hunt.

MY goal wasnt,and still Isnt to try and convince anyone of anything.. My dog activity in the HT world is recreation,,pure and simple. I like the people and the social aspect of the venues.

Thats all it is for me..

I am sure Bill Hillmann has a reason for sending his dogs on "Back" He makes Videos and gives seminars,and makes a living talking about training dogs. People listen to him. He convinces many. Good for him.

Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I am fully aware I used the Word "I " a lot!

Sorry!


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

BJGatley said:


> Edit: The OP likes to listen to his voice.


Pot meet kettle!!


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

M


jhnnythndr said:


> This is what I first replied to.
> 
> This to me reads like a description of a dog that's not adequately trained. If a handler is worried his dog is going to break honor for a specific reason- he lacks confidence in his dogs ........... Training.
> 
> ...


Here's the deal, at every level of our sport, it is still a game of inches, where we strive for every minute advantage. I have seen some high level titled dogs that were sent on back for blinds and marks, I'd say 90% are sent on their name for marks, though I'd like to see a poll on that. I'm with Ted, I want my dog to know when it's a blind 'dead bird' and when its a mark 'mark'. I've never honored beside a working dog that was sent on back, but I don't think y dog would break no matter what the working handler said, but don't test me on that. If my dog breaks on the honor, he was breaking on the bird regardless what the other handler says.

Back to the original point, with so many other aspects of our sport debatable, why worry over something that is so proven with a 90% consensus?


----------



## T.Bond (Jul 7, 2014)

I making my dog sit. And a throwing stick then saying name to sent the fetch. I forgot his name to sent him. For a brain fart minute hahalol. I m I sure I only one to forget his owned dogs name.? He did n go though


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

I had this sudden urge to do a Navajo “Code Talker” Google search.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I'm the resident code breaker. But I thought that one by TBond was pretty clear. If not, I'll break it down for you.

T.Bond, I have forgotten my dogs name at a hunt test. And have released them on the wrong name. If running multiple dogs, I write the dogs name in ink across the top of my left thumb. It happens.


----------



## T.Bond (Jul 7, 2014)

i hav not teached him back as some say. just go on name. I forgetten his name so he just sat there


----------



## Brad (Aug 4, 2009)

Wayne, What if your left handed and the leash wears the ink off your left thumb? I write important notes on top of hand and non important on palm




Wayne Nutt said:


> I'm the resident code breaker. But I thought that one by TBond was pretty clear. If not, I'll break it down for you.
> 
> T.Bond, I have forgotten my dogs name at a hunt test. And have released them on the wrong name. If running multiple dogs, I write the dogs name in ink across the top of my left thumb. It happens.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Brad, Then I say "back". Lol. I hold the lead in my hand not looped over my wrist.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

A mistake. A miscommunication between me and bird boy (my friend Ray). Rowdy may have to go see a doggie therapist.
I'm lining Rowdy up for a blind, dead bird, feet shuffling, no here and a little knee action and then good. Then BB shoots flyer.


----------

