# What IS formal obedience?



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Sounds like a dumb question... but the responses on a related thread got me to wondering. 

I've been studying Bill Hillman's stuff and it seems to me his demos begin when he's working with about a 10-11 week old puppy and they seamlessly progress all the way up to and through transition. 

So, for instance... do you define "formal" obedience as that stage of training when you insist on the pup doing the basic commands you've been teaching him since puppyhood? Or is it something that begins when he's a particular age? Or is it "formal" only in the since that it's "foundational" and precedes field work? 

Hillman's traffic cop routine essentially starts when the very young puppy is learning his first "sit" lessons... and there is never more than minimal (i.e., lowest perceptible stimulation level) pressure throughout. Were those "formal" obedience sessions?

So maybe the question shouldn't be WHEN to do formal OB, but WHAT IS "formal" OB.


----------



## T. Mac (Feb 2, 2004)

Dang girl, this is an easy one!

"Formal" is when you wear your best bib and tucker


Seriously, in my book formal training or formal obedience is not so much the training of the dog (hopefully a puppy) how to learn which is usually (hopefully) started with the breeder. It is the process of getting the pup to listen to the handler and respond to their commands. Normally the first word the pup learns is "no" which they learn to mean they should stop whatever they are doing as it does not please the handler. The next thing that a pup usually learns is that when they do good and the handler is happy then the handler is good to them, either in the form of treats or praise or other positive reinforcement. In my opinion this is where many novice handlers fail their pups, not giving them enough praise or positive reinforcement. The goal here is that they couple the reward to their compliance in executing the command given and not that they will be rewarded for doing just anything. You will see this a lot when you first start your formal training where the pup will go through its list of actions that had previously earned them a reward hoping that one of the actions is right and gets them further rewards. Hence the learning to listen and distinguish the commands and associate them with a particular action. 
. 

T. Mac


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

With a personal dog it is sometimes hard to say when formal ob begins. But I think it is when you start using both positive and negative in enforcing commands.
When training professionally it was when a client brought a dog to me.


----------



## T-Pines (Apr 17, 2007)

Almost 3 years ago, I started studying and practicing Hillmann's complete program on my five dogs, from Puppy through Fundamentals. Let me pose your question to the dogs and I'll get back to you.

Please don't take me for a smartazz. Just a little tongue in cheek to make the point that terminology means nothing to your dogs. Train your dogs according to your program. You'll notice that Hillmann does not use much terminology in his material. You said it yourself ... his process is seamless ... words that describe a definitive and distinct change in the way that you interact with your dog do not apply with Hillmann's program.

With Hillmann, I consider any training session that resembles Bill's work on his DVDs to be formal training. Time spent "hanging out" with your dog and enjoying each other's company is informal training.

Jim


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Is this a Hillman-specific question?

Evan


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Starts right from day 1 you get your pup. Not sure what you mean by formal obedience. Obedience is obedience. Sit means sit. To get you and your pup off to a good start you teach then right away what it is all about, Makes it a whole lot easier on you. JMHO


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

It's the stage when you start using aversives to re-enforce behavior. When to start it depends on the temperament of the pup in question. In the pet practice I have had dogs that not only were tolerant, but IMHO needed formalization at 12 weeks of age (yes 12 weeks) and others where aversives put so much stress on the dog that they were never used (that dog would be washed out in most retriever applications). 

The only thing consistent about when to start, and this is a belief of mine as opposed to a rule, is that the dog needs to demonstrate proficiency in a given behavior using motivational methods before I will add anything aversive. The single exception to this being how to walk with a large dog that's out of control on the end of a leash. In those cases many time the use of a pinch collar is like magic to the client.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

T-Pines said:


> Almost 3 years ago, I started studying and practicing Hillmann's complete program on my five dogs, from Puppy through Fundamentals. Let me pose your question to the dogs and I'll get back to you.
> 
> Please don't take me for a smartazz. Just a little tongue in cheek to make the point that terminology means nothing to your dogs. Train your dogs according to your program. You'll notice that Hillmann does not use much terminology in his material. You said it yourself ... his process is seamless ... words that describe a definitive and distinct change in the way that you interact with your dog do not apply with Hillmann's program.
> 
> ...


I agree. If you "hang" in the retriever training for say 20, 30, 40 or more years, you borrow different methods and incorporate them into what works. It is a semantics game. Rex Carr let his clients name the drills, he didn't have any particular name, just what had worked for him. Mike Lardy took it to a intellectual level, put a spin on it and we have basics, transition, advanced training. Nothing is original in his program, as he sometimes states, he gives credit to those who came before him, formal or modified to his program and so forth. Having been doing this for more then a few years as a amateur trainer of retrievers have used training that has worked for others and modified some of it to fit my training. It is not original. I will cite some examples, I call formal obedience training, AKC obedience, retriever obedience is modified AKC trials formal obedience (novice work if you must). Modified no stay command, no come command, a kinda loose leash off lead heeling, maybe two sided heeling, many don't teach down or stand for examination etc.
So if I said I don't use AKC obedience training, it might raise eye brows. I have done a drill for many years , didn't really have a name for it it called it a split drill. I trained with Mary Hillman one summer and drew a diagram of it and she used it on Viking. I got the drill from a pro, who had got it from Rex Carr when she trained with him as a amateur. Heard a number of folks talk about a "W" drill and thought what the heck is a "W" drill. Saw a diagram and thought well this is the same drill I had been doing for 30 years modified, three bumpers and two long past the slot of the three, maybe using a indent on one. I would run three bumpers about 60 or 70 yards 30 paces apart in a line, then pace 15 through the slots on a double blind, for 200 or 300 yards, cuts down on flaring, gets drive/bottom (haha) past the three shorter blinds without breaking down. The point formal is whatever you want it to be, remember we are not making widgets, repairing machines or diagnosing things we are training retrievers. Kinda like various dialects, my Southern born dad used talk about closing the gap, hunkering down, coal oil , pin (PEN) . My UP of Michigan spouse talks about we go town eh and "how she goin", we have bubblers and water fountains, soda and pop. 
Just my thoughts on it lets just train our dogs and use descriptive methods when "formal" or what methods are you using can't be explained.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Evan said:


> Is this a Hillman-specific question?
> 
> Evan


It is and isn't. I'm buying/reading/watching all the information I can get my hands on. Spent as much on educating myself as I have the puppy who is FC on both dog and dam. 

Perhaps the question has evolved to be... as long as I don't actively screw the pup up, can I use a Chinese menu approach to training her? Like "I'll take one from column A and two from column B with white rice and fried wonton on the side." Practically speaking, depending upon the season and water and such, I may not have the resources to follow one system from soup to nuts (so to speak.)

This means I'm hitting some vocabulary issues.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

1tulip said:


> It is and isn't. I'm buying/reading/watching all the information I can get my hands on. Spent as much on educating myself as I have the puppy who is FC on both dog and dam.
> 
> Perhaps the question has evolved to be... as long as I don't actively screw the pup up*, can I use a Chinese menu approach to training her? Like "I'll take one from column A and two from column B with white rice and fried wonton on the side."* Practically speaking, depending upon the season and water and such, I may not have the resources to follow one system from soup to nuts (so to speak.)
> 
> This means I'm hitting some vocabulary issues.


To answer the part that I highlighted: You can but then you are inevitably going to run into the same problem that everyone else does when they try the "ala carte " method...They have a problem or get stuck and then they ask "How do I fix it"..well do you send them to the menu A or Menu B ?...When people try and mix and match methods its the same way, then they look for quick fix band aid approaches to solve a much bigger problem...

I see it all the time, especially with the "internet trainer", they hear of a particular drill or technique that looks or sounds cool, they go and try that technique but abandon it quickly if they dont see immediate results or get immediate success and go off in search of the next big thing...


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> *It's the stage when you start using aversives to re-enforce behavior.* When to start it depends on the temperament of the pup in question. In the pet practice I have had dogs that not only were tolerant, but IMHO needed formalization at 12 weeks of age (yes 12 weeks) and others where aversives put so much stress on the dog that they were never used (that dog would be washed out in most retriever applications).
> 
> The only thing consistent about when to start, and this is a belief of mine as opposed to a rule, is that the dog needs to demonstrate proficiency in a given behavior using motivational methods before I will add anything aversive. The single exception to this being how to walk with a large dog that's out of control on the end of a leash. In those cases many time the use of a pinch collar is like magic to the client.


What *HE* said! It advances over time.

Evan


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

1tulip said:


> It is and isn't. I'm buying/reading/watching all the information I can get my hands on.  Spent as much on educating myself as I have the puppy who is FC on both dog and dam.
> 
> Perhaps the question has evolved to be... as long as I don't actively screw the pup up, can I use a Chinese menu approach to training her? Like "I'll take one from column A and two from column B with white rice and fried wonton on the side." Practically speaking, depending upon the season and water and such, I may not have the resources to follow one system from soup to nuts (so to speak.)
> 
> This means I'm hitting some vocabulary issues.


1tulip I think you are better to do your basic training with one program. JMO it would seem to be easier on you and your dog. It is more consistent. You want to be able to retrace what you have taught your dog if a problem occurs. Your Chineese menu approach I don't believe will cut it. Repetition and memory are important in a dog's world. Jumping all over taking from here and there is not a solution to teaching solid basics. JMHO


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Great answer Bon. If you have to "back up and simplify" as you typically do several times during training, what do you back up to if you are not following some sort of structured program? Also, I know I do not have near enough experience to deviate from a program and go my own way. Talk about a mess. To me, it is hard enough to learn to read your dog and do the (hopefully) small amount of tailoring to your dog that even a well structured program requires, much less try to mix and match. 

Of course, I have a grand total of about 2.5 years of experience training one dog, so YMMV.



BonMallari said:


> To answer the part that I highlighted: You can but then you are inevitably going to run into the same problem that everyone else does when they try the "ala carte " method...They have a problem or get stuck and then they ask "How do I fix it"..well do you send them to the menu A or Menu B ?...When people try and mix and match methods its the same way, then they look for quick fix band aid approaches to solve a much bigger problem...
> 
> I see it all the time, especially with the "internet trainer", they hear of a particular drill or technique that looks or sounds cool, they go and try that technique but abandon it quickly if they dont see immediate results or get immediate success and go off in search of the next big thing...


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

This is very intimidating... looking at a little black cuddly ball of doglet and thinking about committing to one system. I think, then... based upon what you (collectively) are saying, I must decide from the get go. If that is the case, then my thinking is that I must consider which system I can carry out most consistently. 

If so, that pretty much eliminates Lardy's stuff because TRT really glosses over early puppyhood and very young dog-hood in my view. Smartworks for sure gives structure, instruction and examples to the owner of a puppy but gives no quarter on steps to follow. Hillman's stuff has the virtue of being soooo simple minded (in a good way.) Maybe it's really not. Maybe Hillman's dvd's make it look simple because Bill... talks... so... slowly... and......... deliberately... and... calmly..... while totally... not...noticing............ the wiggly... beastling... on the end................. of... the lead. 

Maybe I just need to rewind Smartworks every few minutes and review it. Again and again and again. 

Getting pup in 2 weeks and a couple days. In the meantime I will review early Smartworks stuff and probably get back to you-all with many more "what-ifs".


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

DarrinGreene said:


> It's the stage when you start using aversives to re-enforce behavior. When to start it depends on the temperament of the pup in question. In the pet practice I have had dogs that not only were tolerant, but IMHO needed formalization at 12 weeks of age (yes 12 weeks) and others where aversives put so much stress on the dog that they were never used (that dog would be washed out in most retriever applications).
> 
> The only thing consistent about when to start, and this is a belief of mine as opposed to a rule, is that the dog needs to demonstrate proficiency in a given behavior using motivational methods before I will add anything aversive. The single exception to this being how to walk with a large dog that's out of control on the end of a leash. In those cases many time the use of a pinch collar is like magic to the client.


That's the crotch of the matter. You know when that pup needs a firm hand. How will I determine it's time to bring on "the aversives"? 

You realize, of course, this likely means more SOS's and miscellaneous whining and fretting from me on RTN. 

Seriously, though my most recent experience with a good little dog (now 5 and being trained by a pro... until the next MN) was that I thought I was using pressure and maybe was too heavy handed (or not... but she sulks really effectively) and maybe wasn't using the right amount when it was needed. Very frustrating and that's what I'm trying to fix before it happens this time.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

You do realize that teaching a puppy how to learn (e.g. treat training) and socializing the pup is one thing and that formal OB is really the beginning of the formal training program, right?

I have seen more than a few posters here talking about an easy transition from Hillmann's puppy stuff to Lardy's TRT, and I don't think the two are in any way mutually exclusive as they address different things. JMHO.

As for committing to one program, if you really look at all the Carr-based systems, Lardy's TRT and Smartworks probably being the two most well-known examples, there's not really a whole lot of difference except the order in which things are done. 

HOWEVER, you should note that in either program, the order matters as to that program. One reason you shouldn't mix and match without some experience is that you may go to a next step that your last step did not provide the building blocks for. 



1tulip said:


> This is very intimidating... looking at a little black cuddly ball of doglet and thinking about committing to one system. I think, then... based upon what you (collectively) are saying, I must decide from the get go. If that is the case, then my thinking is that I must consider which system I can carry out most consistently.
> 
> If so, that pretty much eliminates Lardy's stuff because TRT really glosses over early puppyhood and very young dog-hood in my view. Smartworks for sure gives structure, instruction and examples to the owner of a puppy but gives no quarter on steps to follow. Hillman's stuff has the virtue of being soooo simple minded (in a good way.) Maybe it's really not. Maybe Hillman's dvd's make it look simple because Bill... talks... so... slowly... and......... deliberately... and... calmly..... while totally... not...noticing............ the wiggly... beastling... on the end................. of... the lead.
> 
> ...


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Formal obedience is subjective, that's why it is a good idea to be with an experience group of dog folks to help you along. 
One thing is known though....Once formal obedience begins, it becomes the dog's lifetime.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

1tulip said:


> This is very intimidating... looking at a little black cuddly ball of doglet and thinking about committing to one system. I think, then... based upon what you (collectively) are saying, I must decide from the get go. If that is the case, then my thinking is that I must consider which system I can carry out most consistently.
> 
> If so, that pretty much eliminates Lardy's stuff because TRT really glosses over early puppyhood and very young dog-hood in my view. Smartworks for sure gives structure, instruction and examples to the owner of a puppy but gives no quarter on steps to follow. Hillman's stuff has the virtue of being soooo simple minded (in a good way.) Maybe it's really not. Maybe Hillman's dvd's make it look simple because Bill... talks... so... slowly... and......... deliberately... and... calmly..... while totally... not...noticing............ the wiggly... beastling... on the end................. of... the lead.
> 
> ...


Do you have the books as well as DVDs? They work together, and lay out a Flow Chart, and step by step progression for advancement at all levels - beginning to end.

Evan


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Evan said:


> Do you have the books as well as DVDs? They work together, and lay out a Flow Chart, and step by step progression for advancement at all levels - beginning to end.
> 
> Evan


I am not trying to rain on your parade, please believe me, but it is not a perfect world and as long as we are dealing with animals we are always going to have to make some adjustments and hopefully the experience folks will chine in or help. I firmly believe that is what all of us want.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I think you are misreading the warning against mixing programs. I used Mertens for very young treat training, Hillman for traffic cop sit, etc and then transitioned to Lardy. At this point you should stay with one program.


----------



## axegothic3 (Jul 20, 2013)

I think more so than a single system of your choosing, finding a group of retriever enthusiasts to train with and ask questions and have drills demonstrated is FAR more important!


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

That can be very good advice, or very poor advice depending on the group. It's not unusual in any setting that the folks who actually know the least are the most eager and vocal about offering help. They mean well, but if you're a new trainer it's tough to know the difference. Play it smart.

Evan


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Evan said:


> That can be very good advice, or very poor advice depending on the group. It's not unusual in any setting that the folks who actually know the least are the most eager and vocal about offering help. They mean well, but if you're a new trainer it's tough to know the difference. Play it smart.
> 
> Evan


Not only can the advice be good/bad... it can also consist of suggested methods that work for the individual who is offering them. I would posit that with any method there are operator variables. I teach in a school of nursing and though we all teach to the same standards, no two instructors do things exactly the same way. In fact, the way we reason about our practice is highly variable. And frankly this is not an altogether bad thing. It provides a variety of perspectives to the student and where one instructor fails to get through to a weak student, something will click between that student and another instructor and success happens.

I think I am the proverbial weak student. My experience with my previous dog was that my training group was not helpful. The fault was, however, largely mine. I wasn't consistent and I ran out of time (job change) and turned the dog over to a pro who has done a superb job. But working with this pro you can tell that she has honed her skills over a long time. She reads and diagnoses a dog's behavior almost intuitively and can come up with the proper response to problems as they reveal themselves.

I think if I had persevered and worked more intensely with my dog, things might have been different. With this new puppy... I almost have no choice. She arrives here in the deepest part of winter when no one is training and there are few distractions. It'll be just the two of us. 

The other thing I've noticed about weak students is that if they are motivated enough, they usually pull it out. I think this time I'm more realistic and I'm certainly more determined. We'll see what happens...


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

1tulip said:


> Not only can the advice be good/bad... it can also consist of suggested methods that work for the individual who is offering them. I would posit that with any method there are operator variables. I teach in a school of nursing and though we all teach to the same standards, no two instructors do things exactly the same way. In fact, the way we reason about our practice is highly variable. And frankly this is not an altogether bad thing. It provides a variety of perspectives to the student and where one instructor fails to get through to a weak student, something will click between that student and another instructor and success happens.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There will come a time where a group setting is vary valuable to reach your goals. That being said, it will be up to you to keep intouch with your trainer. He or she is most likely willing to help, but If you don't call they will think everything is going fine.

Keith


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

If you don't ask, then you will never know. A lot of us have been in that situation and when we look back, wish we would of ask that question.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

evan said:


> that can be very good advice, or very poor advice depending on the group. It's not unusual in any setting that the folks who actually know the least are the most eager and vocal about offering help. They mean well, but if you're a new trainer it's tough to know the difference. Play it smart.
> 
> Evan


gotta agree with you on that!!!


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

A good training group has been invaluable to me. I only wish I would have found it earlier so that maybe I could have avoided a couple issues. As for who to listen to, you might want to pick the one whose dogs look and act like you want yours to act. Not a guarantee, but perhaps a good place to start.

Evan's comment is too true sometimes. It seems like the folks who know the most also know how dangerous it is to come off the cuff with cure-all remedies for a dog they don't really know.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

A group can be helpful but I don't think it can be a substitute for getting a training program and following it. Then a
Group member can help you through some difficult issues.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Wayne Nutt said:


> A group can be helpful but I don't think it can be a substitute for getting a training program and following it. Then a
> Group member can help you through some difficult issues.


This. Wayne, i need some lessons from you on brevity and being succinct with my posts.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Evan said:


> That can be very good advice, or very poor advice depending on the group. It's not unusual in any setting that the folks who actually know the least are the most eager and vocal about offering help. They mean well, but if you're a new trainer it's tough to know the difference. Play it smart.
> 
> Evan


Evan very true. There are many who want to give out their advice. It is hard for the newcomer to sift through how helpful this will be to them. This is a whole topic on its own!


----------



## 1goodog (May 3, 2013)

Day 1--gotta teach them to behave as they should. We flew home with our 18 month old. While he was a puppy rock star on the flight, once home---SIT. Its a great game early. They love taking in the attention from you too. Take advantage of it but dont overdose em. They are little kids.


----------



## 1goodog (May 3, 2013)

And "What is formal obedience?" Establishing a relationship between eventual adult dog and handler. Lots more than that.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

BonMallari said:


> To answer the part that I highlighted: You can but then you are inevitably going to run into the same problem that everyone else does when they try the "ala carte " method...They have a problem or get stuck and then they ask "How do I fix it"..well do you send them to the menu A or Menu B ?...When people try and mix and match methods its the same way, then they look for quick fix band aid approaches to solve a much bigger problem...
> 
> I see it all the time, especially with the "internet trainer", they hear of a particular drill or technique that looks or sounds cool, they go and try that technique but abandon it quickly if they dont see immediate results or get immediate success and go off in search of the next big thing...




My definition of formal obedience begins when the dog is old enough to begin real training instead of play training. To borrow from an earlier thread I now call the very early puppy training "influential training". Your training the puppy but he doesn't know he's being trained. Formal obedience begins when you can start adding some correction and insisting that things are done right, setting the standard that will be upheld forever. He now KNOWS he is being trained.
Now to respond to Bon's thread. I pretty much agree but put his post together with Earls post #8. More important than following one method or another is following a flow chart which I believe Lardy pretty much sets the table. Don't be afraid to think for yourself. You will learn nothing without putting your own thought into what you are doing and how to achieve it. The exact method you use to teach one step or another is not as important as progressing through the steps. You cant reach the top step without taking the first one.
People like Mr Lardy or Mr Farmer do things that I cannot and their way of going about certain steps are awkward to me but we proceed through the flow chart the same. Another good example is that we all know that Evan and I very much disagree on the use of a rope but we progress through stages of training the same.
Do whatever works for you but don't skip any steps. Don't be afraid to think outside the box. Where would we be now if people like Rex didn't really put a lot of thought into what was needed to get the results he wanted. Dog training is not a menu A or B if it were it would be easy.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Steve Shaver said:


> My definition of formal obedience begins when the dog is old enough to begin real training instead of play training. To borrow from an earlier thread I now call the very early puppy training "influential training". Your training the puppy but he doesn't know he's being trained. Formal obedience begins when you can start adding some correction and insisting that things are done right, setting the standard that will be upheld forever. He now KNOWS he is being trained.
> Now to respond to Bon's thread. I pretty much agree but put his post together with Earls post #8. More important than following one method or another is following a flow chart which I believe Lardy pretty much sets the table. Don't be afraid to think for yourself. You will learn nothing without putting your own thought into what you are doing and how to achieve it. The exact method you use to teach one step or another is not as important as progressing through the steps. You cant reach the top step without taking the first one.
> People like Mr Lardy or Mr Farmer do things that I cannot and their way of going about certain steps are awkward to me but we proceed through the flow chart the same. Another good example is that we all know that Evan and I very much disagree on the use of a rope but we progress through stages of training the same.
> Do whatever works for you but don't skip any steps. Don't be afraid to think outside the box. Where would we be now if people like Rex didn't really put a lot of thought into what was needed to get the results he wanted. Dog training is not a menu A or B if it were it would be easy.


It probably is a good idea once the pup gets older to attend an obedience class not a puppy class. You really wont learn on the internet but doing in a class with other dogs and people is really where it is at! This will help you immensely. You work off lead with the other dogs and people around. Great experience. IMO


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Sit means Sit.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

Formal obedience is kind of like marriage. It begins when the honeymoon is over.


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

polmaise said:


> Sit means Sit.


* YES ROBERT!! *

A remarkably simple but accurate definition of formal obedience. 

*The day you start to teach and insist that "Sit means Sit"!*

Cheers

PS. My better half, Fiona, hails from Dundee also-guess that's where she got "No means No"


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

KwickLabs said:


> Formal obedience is kind of like marriage. It begins when the honeymoon is over.


Remarkably, was I thinking the same thing when I typed my last post at the same time as you?


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> * YES ROBERT!! *
> 
> A remarkably simple but accurate definition of formal obedience.
> 
> ...


.Them Lassie's from Dundee Mean what they say ! 
I once stopped just off the 'Kingsway' to ask directions to a woman (Your good lady will know what I'm talking about) and asked if there was a ''B&Q'' (Hardware store) in Dundee?
The lady replied ''No, but there is two D's and two E's ! ;-)


----------



## J. Walker (Feb 21, 2009)

When I train a dog, formal obedience starts around six months of age. By this point, the dog has had months of puppy time, treat training, and basic leash training. What he hasn't had is training in the real world where I will make a dog do long sit-stays at a duck pond while ducks swim by only feet away or having the dog do recall work on a long leash with people walking their dogs or riding bicycles a few yards away. I will also do heeling work at places like kids' soccer games with the kids running and the balls rolling by as strong distractions. I teach dogs to automatically sit at heel when I stop walking such as approaching an intersection. I have seen many dogs whose obedience is flawless in the back yard but who come unglued in public. The systematic teaching of the commands in a strict manner and gradually increasing real world distractions is "formal obedience" to me.


----------

