# Hillmann force fetch or traditional method?



## TexasAce (May 6, 2016)

Hello all, 

I have a 12 week old BLF puppy that I am taking through Bill Hillmann's "Training a Retriever Puppy" puppy DVD program. I intend to transition to Lardy's TRT 2 at the appropriate time. I am studying it now, both the DVD's and the journal articles. Looking ahead, I have heard about Hillmann's DVD "The fetch command" and I am intrigued by his method and I like what I see in the dogs he trains. My only reservation is that I am not sure about how it will work with the methods Lardy uses later in his program. I want to make sure that whatever I use now sets her up for success in the future. Will Hillmann's method of ff compliment Lardy's training program or should I go ahead and ff the traditional way ? 

Thanks in advance,

TexasAce


----------



## O.clarki (Feb 7, 2012)

I am only familiar with Lardy and Spence's FF process. What, in a nutshell, is Hillmann's approach? How does it differ?


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

O.clarki said:


> I am only familiar with Lardy and Spence's FF process. What, in a nutshell, is Hillmann's approach? How does it differ?


Hillmann FF is a non ear pinch method. You teach "hold" and then "fetch" as a command. Once the dog is fetching on command from their own desire you've built up you re-enforce the command with many very light nicks on the e-collar.


----------



## Gold Strike Labradors (Jan 8, 2014)

I spent a month training with a trainer who uses Bill Hillmann's training philosophy and methods. All the dogs and started dogs at the kennel were FF'd using Hillmann's method. This method does not employ ear pinch or high heat on the collar. The length of time the dogs takes to be finished FF depends. Bill's method of FF requires repetition and practice, practice, practice and reinforcement with low power e-collar nicks only when the dog is finished with FF. Go to the classifieds and see if you can find a gently used "The Fetch Command" DVD.


----------



## NateB (Sep 25, 2003)

Last pup I followed Hillmans method right up to FF, but did my traditional FF, James Spencer method. I know of people who did the Hillman FF method and then transitioned over to TRT successfully, so it has been done. I am considering it for my next pup, but have not decided.


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

I understand why some might want to go the Hillmann FF route because I did as well. If you do and are able to get your dog to the point Hillmann does using his FF method then why not just continue with Hillmann? 

If you aren't doing traditional FF then I'm not sure following the rest of TRT would be fair to the dog.

I decided to do the traditional FF with my pup and saw nothing but positive results including a substantial increase in desire.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

It's totally fair to do Hillman then TRT = TRT lays out the process much more clearly than Hillman, at this point, once you leave the FF stage.


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

DarrinGreene said:


> It's totally fair to do Hillman then TRT = TRT lays out the process much more clearly than Hillman, at this point, once you leave the FF stage.




Darrin, are you saying it's fair to do Hillmann puppy program and Hillmann fetch then start at TRT simple casting, CC, and pile work as the flow chart shows?

I agree that doing the Hillmann puppy program and the starting TRT is totally fair but what about forcing a dog during pile work who has never been taught about pressure? Or CC a dog as in TRT? 

I dont fully understand but everything I've read says that the traditional FF method prepares the dog to learn how to deal with pressure positively.

Im not arguing just wanting to learn...


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

TexasAce, Bryan and - for the open-mined, feel free to read this link:

http://www.billhillmann.net/reviewFetchComm.htm

What Dennis wrote made a lot of sense to me. I never liked the ear pinch stuff. And I LOVE dog training! Prior to Dennis' article that's linked, I thought James B. Spencer laid out a more "friendly" way to do it so I FF'd his way and then did Mike Lardy's material after. 

But if Dennis Voigt can have the kind of successes he can, and if he himself chose to try to get away from the ear pinch, and use the Hillmann approach, maybe so could I.

I have done the Hillmann fetch approach with a grand total of one puppy. I am extremely happy with the results thus far. The article I linked was the final factor in my deciding to do it. I would choose to FF my future pups the same way at this time.

Chris


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Back nick back is just an extension of fetch nick fetch - it's the same scheme.


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

DarrinGreene said:


> Back nick back is just an extension of fetch nick fetch - it's the same scheme.


What about the level of force? Hillmann land fundamentals does "back nick back" but with very light nicks. Do you think forcing back as in TRT would be ok without previously doing traditional FF?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Bryan Parks said:


> Darrin, are you saying it's fair to do Hillmann puppy program and Hillmann fetch then start at TRT simple casting, CC, and pile work as the flow chart shows?
> 
> I agree that doing the Hillmann puppy program and the starting TRT is totally fair but what about forcing a dog during pile work who has never been taught about pressure? Or CC a dog as in TRT?
> 
> ...


Back before Bill Hillmann had come out with his land basics and water basics material, Dennis Voigt had documented that he'd taken his puppies all the way through Hillmann Fetch and then moved into the Lardy program at the force to pile phase. He was quite happy with the results.

Bill Hillmann has since released his land and water basics. 

Maybe Dennis will come in from the southern climate and comment. 

Chris


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

Chris Atkinson said:


> TexasAce, Bryan and - for the open-mined, feel free to read this link:
> 
> http://www.billhillmann.net/reviewFetchComm.htm
> 
> ...


i read that around the time I was getting ready for FF last year. I was all on board for Hillmann fetch but I couldn't get Kimber to the level of desire needed. I decided to go with TRT2 and a light came on with her and she became a little ball of fire and things took off. I still employ a lot of Hillmann methods and style. I would say I follow both Hillmann's land and water fundamentals as well as TRT2. I follow the flow chart of TRT but employ techniques in Hillmann's videos and do not move on until the lesson is learned. 

I will take a very open minded approach with my next puppy and choose what is best for that puppy as we progress.


----------



## TexasAce (May 6, 2016)

Chris, I have read that article several times and it really appeals to me. I did not pick up on the fact that Dennis Voigt had taken dogs through Hillmann's ff and then on to Lardy. The way I see it, which may be incorrect, Hillmann's method is essentially just teaching ff thorough CC to fetch. Is that right? Please correct me if I am wrong, but I suppose that if you did not get what you were looking for with the Hillmann method, you could still go back and FF the traditional way and may actually be ahead of the game because the dog would already know the command "fetch" and you would just be solidifying it with the ear pinch. I guess what I am trying to ask is, would there be any downside to trying Hillmann's method and then going to traditional ff if needed?


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

I tried "Hillman's" approach with my current youngster based on what Chris and Dennis wrote. I like the idea, but it didn't work for this pup. She wasn't "typical" in my (limited/15 dog) experience and just wasn't making progress until collar conditioning drew a line in the sand, followed by regular force fetch following the TRT2 video. Now at age 2 she needs little "correction" - mostly teaching (in the field, she's a devil playing), and I think she'll be the best dog I've owned.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

TexasAce said:


> Chris, I have read that article several times and it really appeals to me. I did not pick up on the fact that Dennis Voigt had taken dogs through Hillmann's ff and then on to Lardy. The way I see it, which may be incorrect, Hillmann's method is essentially just teaching ff thorough CC to fetch. Is that right? Please correct me if I am wrong, but I suppose that if you did not get what you were looking for with the Hillmann method, you could still go back and FF the traditional way and may actually be ahead of the game because the dog would already know the command "fetch" and you would just be solidifying it with the ear pinch. I guess what I am trying to ask is, would there be any downside to trying Hillmann's method and then going to traditional ff if needed?


Hi Texas Ace. 

Sentence three in your paragraph does not make much sense to me. 

To me, the Hillmann approach is a seamless progression where the puppy doesn't even realize that the next day is any different than the prior day. By the time the dog is in the "fetch" process, he's already been extremely conditioned on"sit" and the rope or collar reinforcements that come with it. 

Pup already understands "the game" and what he needs to do to play the game. Pup is connected to you, pup wants to do it right. Pup wants to get paid. 

THe fetch process is just a smooth progression from there. 

You have my real name. You have my phone number. 

Chris


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

I still stand by my review written about 6 years ago.

http://www.billhillmann.net/reviewFetchComm.htm

Since then I have done 4 dogs using Hillmann and no ear pinch! The first is a CFC CAFC, 2X National Finalist (very close both times). I do not know of any other field trial titled dogs doing Hillmann and I predicted that years ago. Simply put, few Pros or experienced Amateurs will change their conventional and proven to them methods. 

Secondly, I am not convinced that many truly understand Hillmans current teaching approach enough to deal with certain types of dogs. Some of the comments in this thread illustrate that! I know several trainers that say they follow Hilmann but it is obvious they do not. Of course, the exact same thing can be said about Lardy TRT. Many claim to follow-Many do not!

There is no problem whatsoever transitioning to Lardy from Hillmann puppy. You have to understand that CC occurs before FF in Hillmann. That's the opposite in Lardy. You have to also understand that although Hillmann uses low level and much reinforcement, he also escalates as required when distraction levels are high. Perhaps because I have used the e-collar for over 30 years in a variety of methods, I do not find the adaption difficult. BUT, the principles are always the same-- maintain ABC-Attitude, Balance, Control. Sometimes Control requires escalation and Hillmann describes this on YouTube. 

The dogs transition to corrections at higher levels so easily if they understand reinforcement of basic skills. From Hillmann I would be at the Pile work level in Lardy. Prior to this they would have experienced some higher levels in basic obedience.

Interestingly, this winter I arrived in FL with an 18 month old that hadn't had water work since 12 months. I noticed he was dropping water mark birds to shake at delivery the first week. My first thought was OH OH- my e-collar FF was poor -I wonder if he will need ear pinch lessons? I did ONE e-collar review session (sometimes with higher level) perhaps 5 minutes and the issue was gone. For me-more confirmation.

Bottom-lines? 

1. Do what you need to do to achieve success especially when exploring a new method to you.

2. Don't assume all dogs will respond the same to what you did last time.

3. Don't blame the method based on a sample of one (maybe blame yourself?)

4. Question whether you are really following an approach or program or philosophy (half-assed is likely half wrong)

I could go on but,

Cheers

Dennis


----------



## TexasAce (May 6, 2016)

Chris, I agree. What I was trying to articulate was that it seems to me that the way Hillmann does ff, by teaching it so thoroughly and gradually and by having the dog performing the command because he wants to, by the time you start to add collar pressure you are essentially at collar fetch. It just seems like you can get "there" with a lot less pressure and a lot less stress on the dog and the trainer and have a dog with a much better attitude when you are finished.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Bryan - Dennis wrote a great response to your question that is based in actual retriever experience. I would have written the same except from a general standpoint about dogs. I usually condition the dog with minimal stimulation then go looking for the dogs "working level" once they understand the correct responses. I do this for a bunch of reasons, not the least of which is that I'm not personally doing the work and mistakes at lower levels do little if any damage to the dog's attitude. I'd have to guess but I'd bet Bill's rationale for keeping pressure low until the dog is older and fully understands his job (if not forever) is based in attitude preservation also. 

Once they understand the basic reinforcement schedule and that there is ultimately a reward for the correct behavior - you can increase your stim level and not crush their attitude. That the simple explanation.


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

It does answer my question and makes a lot of sense. 

Because I am new to this game I read a lot of things and in my own mind they do not make sense but what do I know? Right?....So I sometimes go down a path because the "experts" say that's how it needs to be done because of one reason or another that I don't fully grasp. I am grateful to those people and the time they've lent to me and if it works for them then that's great and I'll still learn all I can from them but apply it how I see fit.

I can say however, that my dog has a wonderful training attitude and we have a lot of fun together. She's the only dog I'm training and I'm with her everyday. I did do ear pinch FF and I don't see that it caused any lowering of attitude. This is just one dog, it might be that it's just her and it might be that when we train it's fun for her.

i was thinking about this topic this morning as we were running the "Y drill from home-plate" as described by Hillmann. I'm a grown man and at one point I was on the ground rubbing my dogs belly in the middle of a costal field just enjoying the beautiful weather we are having and enjoying being out with my dog. 

My point is that if the dog has a bad attitude and you aren't having fun then what's the point?!? My dog's atitude and desire only increased after I did FF. I wish I would have kept some of the videos I took. I showed many to Chris and was struggling to get my pup excited and focused. After FF her attitude was like night and day to me. It may have been the FF that did it or timing or a combination of things but the FF did not cause this terrible attitude many talk about. 

I may not ear pinch my next dog or I might. I will do what's best for the dog. In the end if the dog is happy and learned the lesson does it really matter how it was done? I wasn't so sure....that's why I asked. I had read and heard that it did.


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

Bryan Parks said:


> It does answer my question and makes a lot of sense.
> 
> Because I am new to this game I read a lot of things and in my own mind they do not make sense but what do I know? Right?....So I sometimes go down a path because the "experts" say that's how it needs to be done because of one reason or another that I don't fully grasp.
> 
> ...


I did basically the same as you with the current pup I'm working with. I went through the Hillmann puppy program and began to teach the fetch with excitement that he teaches. I also taught him HOLD more similar to traditional practices(starting with a leather glove, moving to paint roller, then bumpers). After that was solid, I began traditional FF. 

With all the ground work that was done up to that point, FF was extremely easy and not a harsh, barbaric practice that many make it out to be. I didn't have to apply high amounts of pressure to his ear to get the dog's drive to fetch in high gear. Went through all the steps(ear pinch, fetch to ground, walking fetch, collar fetch, fetch/no fetch, Force to pile, etc). Like you, my dog's drive increased(not decreased) during/after FF. 

He is what you would deem as somewhat soft or a Type B dog as Danny Farmer classifies them. He has a great training attitude now, knows how to deal with pressure. I'll likely take that same path with the next pup I start. I don't think traditional force fetch has to be a horror story for the dog or the trainer if you lay the necessary foundation leading up to that point.

Most trainers say that force fetch is the foundation of all training. I think the foundation starts well before that, JMO.


----------

