# Cheating Singles, When, How and Why?



## Wade Scroggins (Mar 7, 2013)

As an amateur this is always one of the more challenging concepts to work on, affected by lack of experience, and often times access to ideal grounds. It is one of the most critical elements of training for hunt test at the higher levels, and all levels of the field trial world. My personal experience and my observations of others at events across the country have proven to me that it is the most frequent reason for failure at events, so must be an area of needed improvement.

We frequently train with Pro's from both the hunt test and field trial venues and I have seen many variations of the process for corrections on cheating singles. It is understood that there are different phases, young dog just being introduced, transition dogs, and advanced dogs. I would like to see some discussion on the different processes applied to the different level of dogs.

Some examples would be, do you recall and resend, do you correct in route and handle, when do you use force/correction based on dogs level, and how much force/correction is appropriate based on dogs level? Based on my time spent training with various Pro's and amateurs I have seen what appears to be significant differences in practices, of course it may have just been my interpretation of what was being used.

It is a skill that I am still trying to improve on and I think that others are likely in the same boat. I would hope to get some good discussion from the great resources available here.


Wade Scroggins


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

This has been on here for 7 hours with no response. I think it's a good topic and I'd like to hear some thoughts.

I currently just de-cheated my pup. I train alone so I did a lot of hand thrown down the shore marks. She has a really good attitude so I was able to do a lot of call backs and re-send. I would whistle stop when she went to cheat and gave a light nick. She would typically do it "right" the next send. I probably did about half callbacks and half casts. 

We carried on like that for a while making some progress. I then gave one big correction on an obvious cheat. It clicked after that. She rarely tries to cheat but I'm always ready in case she tries. 

I was probably nagging her some by doing so many of those hand thrown cheaters with light corrections. However, calling her back so much taught her what I wanted and then I was able to give that big correction and she immediately knew "ok I can't get away with this anymore"

It was almost comical because after that correction she took way to much water. 

We are still working on it and I can't offer much advise just thought I'd share.

Hope to hear some advise on this topic and different ways of handling different types of dogs.


----------



## Wade Scroggins (Mar 7, 2013)

Bryan,
I appreciate the response and it is funny that your experience is very close to the same as mine. You touched on many of the issues I was hoping to get feedback on, during your experience you recalled and resent dog, you also did in route handle with corrections. You indicated that there may have been some nagging, and that with one particular larger correction you saw a dramatic improvement.

The tough part is to know when each method is best, when to provide a larger correction, even when is a correction warranted instead of attrition on casting back to the line.

A situation I had was running a long water mark with a strong slightly crossing wind, dog appears to be giving good effort but appears to be caving to the wind factor, I gave a literal cast to correct line and didn't get the change I was looking for. I stopped her again and gave a strong verbal NO with a literal cast and she finished the mark strong. Same mark with a different dog the same sequence didn't have desired results and Pro I was training with recommended letting her commit to the bank then give a strong correction. Just as she was beaching I stopped her gave a strong collar and verbal correction, she took the correction and completed mark.

So I ran 2 dog's on the same mark and used to different sequences to get the desired results, the tough part is READING the dog to know what and when is needed. I am hoping to get feedback from others as to their process and so that I can improve my training.

Wade




Bryan Parks said:


> This has been on here for 7 hours with no response. I think it's a good topic and I'd like to hear some thoughts.
> 
> I currently just de-cheated my pup. I train alone so I did a lot of hand thrown down the shore marks. She has a really good attitude so I was able to do a lot of call backs and re-send. I would whistle stop when she went to cheat and gave a light nick. She would typically do it "right" the next send. I probably did about half callbacks and half casts.
> 
> ...


----------



## J. Walker (Feb 21, 2009)

As far as how I deal with cheating marks, I decide from the beginning the landmarks that define what is and is not acceptable such as handle if the dog is right of that bush, left of that stand of cattails, etc. I learned from my mentor long ago to recall on obvious cheating when the dog has not hit the water and handle once the dog is in the water. The reason is that, in general, I want the dog to make the decision on his own to get in the water not just because he was handled in which case, he made no decision to get into the water. The lone exception would be a cheating re-entry situation. In that case, I may handle or recall depending upon the dog and his level of experience. I dealt with that this evening with a very cheaty mark with an extremely thin re-entry with nothing but land to the gun once on the second piece of land. My Derby dog got out of the first piece of water then started straight for the gun. I stopped him and recalled him back to me across the first body of water without correction. The recall was attrition of sorts. Again, I wanted him to make the decision on his own to get into the second piece of water. He clearly understood why he was recalled and hammered the mark the second time going dead straight into the second piece of water and past the gun, returning to me with a great attitude. Had he cheated in the second piece of water, I would have handled him but the first piece of water was only about 40 yards so I felt recalling him would be more beneficial than handling once he exited and initially went toward the gun.


----------



## Brad B (Apr 29, 2004)

First always remember that in dog training there is little of 'if dog does A you do B and get C' So each situation could be different even with the same dog. 

High rollers are more tolerant of recalls, but if any dog just shows outright lack of effort they might get recalled too regardless. But you have to let the dog make that decision and commit to the cheat so they are clear on why they are being recalled. Softer low drive dogs I tend to use gunner help if needed(rethrow if a memory bird for example), and I rely more on attrition when introducing dogs at first. Advanced dogs that "know better" are more likely to get collar pressure, however I have a 7 yo. MH that hardly ever gets the collar, stopping her and a verbal correction is often enough for her. All my dogs learn in swim-by, the cue/command of 'get in the water', sometimes just stopping them and giving that 'reminder' is enough. I'm not above repeating a mark either to make sure they get the point across. I also like to do drills that help teach the dog, then when you actually do run a cheaty mark they seem to be more familiar with the picture. 
One consistent thing I see training with AMs is they expect the dog to do the mark correctly and are spectating and thus are not prepared to react. Depending on the set up, the dog can make it around that corner so fast that the teaching moment is lost even if you repeated the mark. You have to have your head in the game and expect the dog to cheat every time and have a plan in place of how you'll react. Or at least be on the ball enough to blow that whistle (that's usually not in their mouth), and then take a second if you have to and figure out what the best course of correction is.

I also think folks feel that de-cheating is a step in training that once you've done it some that it's "done". I feel that it's a life long maintenance skill akin to KRD's that need to be touched on periodically in order for the dog to be comfortable.

One last tip that I was taught. Be careful using collar pressure around water, hard to take it back on some dogs and you can create a phobia and compound your problem.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

I two whistled a qualifying water blind. All that handling is too much work, jk.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

When- after the dog is running elementary cold land blinds
How- as described in Lardy's TRT. Stop dog when you read the cheat. Collar correct for cast refusal, don't recall except for a grossly poor initial line. Preference is for a well defined channel where you can back up from ~100 yards, but not always available. 
Why- dogs that cheat get lost, and even if they don't, they get marked down or dropped for cheating.


----------



## RetrieverNation (Jul 15, 2012)

How many good dogs get screwed up by poor application of de-cheating methods or just plain old poor methods? Is the end goal to get a dog that is as comfortable in water as it is land, especially on the edges of water (two feet wet and two feet dry)? 

When first starting hunt tests my "old school" mentor used the cold burn on the land return when cheating water and then a therapy bumper thrown into the open water method. Watching and learning this method, it really seemed like you could de-cheat a dog in a relatively short amount of time. Now after studying Lardy and working with a few successful field trial pros, that old school method was never even a consideration. My really cheaty dog spent more than a year and a half with cheating being her biggest training issue with a full time pro. I am pretty sure I would have screwed this dog up by trying to apply a quick fix to the cheating and have really tried to understand the correct approach. Not sure I understand every reason why but will say I am very happy where the dog is at today. She is comfortable at the shore line, even at a long distance and has a great training attitude. It just took way longer than I would have ever expected to get there.


----------



## P T Brown (Apr 11, 2017)

Very interesting dialog, numerous suggestions for an age old problem. 

Training retrievers has made quantum leaps over the years. This is most certainly good.

Once upon a time the cures for cheating were products manufactured by Winchester, Remington, or Federal 8 or 9 shot !!


----------



## Wade Scroggins (Mar 7, 2013)

This is good feedback on how retriever training as evolved, and with some references to old methods. Looks like you have the dog you hoped for and it is that which I am looking for, but the road to the results isn't always clear.

Wade




RetrieverNation said:


> How many good dogs get screwed up by poor application of de-cheating methods or just plain old poor methods? Is the end goal to get a dog that is as comfortable in water as it is land, especially on the edges of water (two feet wet and two feet dry)?
> 
> When first starting hunt tests my "old school" mentor used the cold burn on the land return when cheating water and then a therapy bumper thrown into the open water method. Watching and learning this method, it really seemed like you could de-cheat a dog in a relatively short amount of time. Now after studying Lardy and working with a few successful field trial pros, that old school method was never even a consideration. My really cheaty dog spent more than a year and a half with cheating being her biggest training issue with a full time pro. I am pretty sure I would have screwed this dog up by trying to apply a quick fix to the cheating and have really tried to understand the correct approach. Not sure I understand every reason why but will say I am very happy where the dog is at today. She is comfortable at the shore line, even at a long distance and has a great training attitude. It just took way longer than I would have ever expected to get there.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

When: after swim-by and 5 legged water wagon wheel/ casting have been mastered.(usually 9-12 months)

How: as multiple down the shore sight blinds starting the dog at the shore line,later backing away to give an approach to the water and adjusting my starting line to adjust the cheat, later throwing a marks to these known spots 

Why: De-cheating is an obedience/lining drill. The dog knows it can make the retrieve faster by cheating so the last thing I need with a young dog is the excitement of a mark. IMHO it goes much smoother teaching them where and how to get in the water while they continuously see the pile at the water's edge where they get out, in this controlled boring setting. The dog learns to seek and stay in water without much handling or correction from me. When we get to real cheating marks I know the dog knows the mechanics of this skill and more importantly the dog knows what is expected so he can understand a cheat correction.

Tim


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Tim Carrion said:


> When: after swim-by and 5 legged water wagon wheel/ casting have been mastered.(usually 9-12 months)
> 
> How: as multiple down the shore sight blinds starting the dog at the shore line,later backing away to give an approach to the water and adjusting my starting line to adjust the cheat, later throwing a marks to these known spots
> 
> ...


Where to get in. 
For this drill and others placing a chair draped in white coat placed at waters edge at entry point is good teaching tool. When you get to re-entries use additional chairs at each exit and re-entry point. This helps later for teaching angle entries/exits and not slipping down shore line before entering and caving to land exiting early. For teaching cheating marks prop up a white bumper at waters edge and have BB throw just behind it on land. Same for teaching stay in don't cheat on water blinds. White bumper propped up at end of channel. Channel 5-10yds wide works.


----------



## fnsret (Nov 12, 2003)

I remember back when I was a young BB I hid in the bushes as the big bad boogie man with one of those big thick plastic bats and yelled and screamed up and down the shore on decheating drills and shore sight blinds to keep the dog in the water. Oh have times changed eventhough I loved doing it as a 12 yr old.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

A couple really good pro tips about de-cheating.

First, consider doing your de-cheating (or at least starting it) where you did swim-by. The dog is already used to being handled in and around the water right there. Subject to change of course based on the swim-by experience.

Second, when you are ready to give corrections for cheating, don't fight the dog to stay on line; let the dog commit to the cheat, sit whistle, correct, and then handle. As it was put to me, give the corrections when they are not where they are supposed to be committed to cheating), don't give corrections where they are supposed to be (more or less online).

Now for my hard-earned knowledge. This is a place where you really have to be able to distinguish between a mistake and a lack of effort. For example, as another poster said, when you give a correction for the cheat and handle into the water, you are liable to get a fat line. Most of the time, that is an indication of effort, much like overcasting on land after a correction, and you probably don't want to collar correct when the dog is making that effort to do what you want (land bad water good in terms of when looking at water get in it). Violations of this principle will put you in violation of the "work on one thing at a time" rule, usually with ugly and unexpected results.


----------



## Wade Scroggins (Mar 7, 2013)

I appreciate the input and this is an interesting variations on the process, will have to this a try with my pup. Hope to get to train with you one day, maybe at one of the specialties down the road.

Wade



Tim Carrion said:


> When: after swim-by and 5 legged water wagon wheel/ casting have been mastered.(usually 9-12 months)
> 
> How: as multiple down the shore sight blinds starting the dog at the shore line,later backing away to give an approach to the water and adjusting my starting line to adjust the cheat, later throwing a marks to these known spots
> 
> ...


----------



## hawgsalot (Nov 7, 2008)

Pro and I had this very thing this morning with my pup. After a couple month lay off, I took the pup back to the kennel and he was running a set of 5 cheating singles. First one was cheating cover mark and the pup blew through right through it, second wasn't a skinny cover cheater and the pup did fine, 3rd one was a double water land water corner thin cheater and the pup tried to skirt the edge. Pro recalled and re threw the mark pup thought about cheating again and the pro blew the whistle and corrected the line by casting. Then he threw the mark again to reinforce if necessary, pup didn't cheat again and didn't cheat on the final 2 marks of the single set. Seems like a good way to correct, 1st the recall to see if the dog can figure it out on it's own, if not handle and enforce any cast refusal. Once you show him the way, reinforce by throwing the mark again until the dog fully understands what your asking and correct any handling issues.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

hawgsalot said:


> Pro and I had this very thing this morning with my pup. After a couple month lay off, I took the pup back to the kennel and he was running a set of 5 cheating singles. First one was cheating cover mark and the pup blew through right through it, second wasn't a skinny cover cheater and the pup did fine, 3rd one was a double water land water corner thin cheater and the pup tried to skirt the edge. Pro recalled and re threw the mark pup thought about cheating again and the pro blew the whistle and corrected the line by casting. Then he threw the mark again to reinforce if necessary, pup didn't cheat again and didn't cheat on the final 2 marks of the single set. Seems like a good way to correct, 1st the recall to see if the dog can figure it out on it's own, if not handle and enforce any cast refusal. Once you show him the way, reinforce by throwing the mark again until the dog fully understands what your asking and correct any handling issues.


I like your post but here is a thought that may not mean much coming from me. If someone gets a cast refusal after running around the water, that seems to me like a sign the dog doesn't understand and know what to do and something is wrong in Dodge City.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

DL said:


> I like your post but here is a thought that may not mean much coming from me. If someone gets a cast refusal after running around the water, that seems to me like a sign the dog doesn't understand and know what to do and something is wrong in Dodge City.


DL, Lardy's approach (may be different than the post you responded to), is to start relatively close to the water (ideally a well defined channel) but challenge the dog by moving back as the dog is successful. Much the same way he does in the no-no drill. So if dog gets in center of channel on first send back up far enough so they may not get in on next send. Once they make the move to cheat-stop and cast-collar correction on a cast refusal only. If trainer is late on the whistle, and dog is too far around to caust into the end of channel, recall to that point and cast. The next send will be from the same spot,or you may move closer to simplify and try to get success. After success you challenge, after the failure you simplify just as with no-no drills (except those are typically all attrition). It is the contrast between the consequences of a success and a failure that lead to the dog learning that when pointed at the water, they get in the water. 

So with Lardy's approach, the dog trying to run around is simply an expected part of the learning process and not a "problem" at all.


----------



## MissSkeeter (May 17, 2013)

captainjack said:


> DL, Lardy's approach (may be different than the post you responded to), is to start relatively close to the water (ideally a well defined channel) but challenge the dog by moving back as the dog is successful. Much the same way he does in the no-no drill. So if dog gets in center of channel on first send back up far enough so they may not get in on next send. Once they make the move to cheat-stop and cast-collar correction on a cast refusal only. If trainer is late on the whistle, and dog is too far around to caust into the end of channel, recall to that point and cast. The next send will be from the same spot,or you may move closer to simplify and try to get success. After success you challenge, after the failure you simplify just as with no-no drills (except those are typically all attrition). It is the contrast between the consequences of a success and a failure that lead to the dog learning that when pointed at the water, they get in the water.
> 
> So with Lardy's approach, the dog trying to run around is simply an expected part of the learning process and not a "problem" at all.



_*Excellent post!*_

Canine understanding via the no-no drills in several different locations typically helps as a prerequisite to de-cheating singles.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

captainjack said:


> DL, Lardy's approach (may be different than the post you responded to), is to start relatively close to the water (ideally a well defined channel) but challenge the dog by moving back as the dog is successful. Much the same way he does in the no-no drill. So if dog gets in center of channel on first send back up far enough so they may not get in on next send. Once they make the move to cheat-stop and cast-collar correction on a cast refusal only. If trainer is late on the whistle, and dog is too far around to caust into the end of channel, recall to that point and cast. The next send will be from the same spot,or you may move closer to simplify and try to get success. After success you challenge, after the failure you simplify just as with no-no drills (except those are typically all attrition). It is the contrast between the consequences of a success and a failure that lead to the dog learning that when pointed at the water, they get in the water.
> 
> So with Lardy's approach, the dog trying to run around is simply an expected part of the learning process and not a "problem" at all.


I didn't realize that the Lardy way of doing it was to only give a correction on a cast refusal. Thanks, that is interesting. I think my point may still be valid regardless of how Lardy does it. If the dog knew he was being stopped for running around the water, and knew he should get in the water and was obedient to that, he would take the cast. I guess people are doing what you are talking about before the dog knows what it is doing wrong, and what it needs to do, and that is the teaching process. That would be correcting for failures to take a cast in the water, when the real infraction is running around the water. Part of my point is that taking a cast into water is a taught skill taught before cheating singles.


----------



## MissSkeeter (May 17, 2013)

MissSkeeter said:


> _*Excellent post!*_
> 
> Canine understanding via the no-no drills in several different locations typically helps as a prerequisite to de-cheating singles.


Another important prerequisite is warm water...pup cheats because he wants to get to the mark as fast as he can, not because the water is cold...water attitude is important!


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

DL said:


> I didn't realize that the Lardy way of doing it was to only give a correction on a cast refusal. Thanks, that is interesting. I think my point may still be valid regardless of how Lardy does it. If the dog knew he was being stopped for running around the water, and knew he should get in the water and was obedient to that, he would take the cast. I guess people are doing what you are talking about before the dog knows what it is doing wrong, and what it needs to do, and that is the teaching process. That would be correcting for failures to take a cast in the water, when the real infraction is running around the water. Part of my point is that taking a cast into water is a taught skill taught before cheating singles.


The dogs are taught to get in the water when headed towards water. Often they get religion as soon as the whistle is blown.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> The dogs are taught to get in the water when headed towards water. Often they get religion as soon as the whistle is blown.


I guess you are saying they learn very quickly doing it only on failure to take a cast when done right.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Corrections on go, sit, come, get in the water. What program are you following?


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> Corrections on go, sit, come, get in the water. What program are you following?


I'm commenting on what CaptainJack posted about the Lardy program only correcting on cheating singles after a cast refusal after the cheat.


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

DL said:


> I didn't realize that the Lardy way of doing it was to only give a correction on a cast refusal. Thanks, that is interesting. I think my point may still be valid regardless of how Lardy does it. If the dog knew he was being stopped for running around the water, and knew he should get in the water and was obedient to that, he would take the cast. I guess people are doing what you are talking about before the dog knows what it is doing wrong, and what it needs to do, and that is the teaching process. That would be correcting for failures to take a cast in the water, when the real infraction is running around the water. Part of my point is that taking a cast into water is a taught skill taught before cheating singles.


This is when you are still in 'teaching' mode. Once a dog understands and has run several cheating singles, they get a correction on the initial cheat. You just have to read your dog. Does the dog still not understand, or does he/she just not want to get in the water?


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

Here's another question. How do you guys handle a dog that over-corrects and wants to consistently go in fat? Do you just handle back to the initial line and then repeat to try and get them to take the correct line?


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

I tried throwing some birds onto points, standing on a shoreline and making the line to the bird down the shoreline a ways, having the dog run past water before getting into water. I didn't point my finger at my dog going fat, but handled if I really had to. I haven't noticed him going fat anymore. I'm just a person with a dog that trains every so often so I don't really know what works.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

bamajeff said:


> Here's another question. How do you guys handle a dog that over-corrects and wants to consistently go in fat? Do you just handle back to the initial line and then repeat to try and get them to take the correct line?


With tuneup drills to get them comfortable with taking small pieces. Conversely I don't do these type tune ups with a do that already wants just the corner.


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

Thanks, Glen

I'm currently doing the tune up below with the dog in question. We'll typically do 3-4 marks, 1-2 cheating singles and the tune up drill.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

In the Lardy material, it suggests doing a easy tune up drill with ins and outs to get a dog used to getting in and out of the water. I did something like that.


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

DL said:


> In the Lardy material, it suggests doing a easy tune up drill with ins and outs to get a dog used to getting in and out of the water. I did something like that.


Unfortunately, I currently don't have access to training water with technical features.


----------



## MissSkeeter (May 17, 2013)

bamajeff said:


> Thanks, Glen
> 
> I'm currently doing the tune up below with the dog in question. We'll typically do 3-4 marks, 1-2 cheating singles and the tune up drill.


Lardy talks about how daily sequencing may have a cumulative effect of retriever attitude.

One approach might be to start with a water tuneup, then 1-2 cheating singles, ending with 3-4 therapy water marks.

Easier and more exciting as the retriever gets more tired, ending the session with low-stress success therapy water marks.

Food for thought?


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

MissSkeeter said:


> Lardy talks about how daily sequencing may have a cumulative effect of retriever attitude.
> 
> One approach might be to start with a water tuneup, then 1-2 cheating singles, ending with 3-4 therapy water marks.
> 
> ...


Excitement is not an issue. Pup loves to work. I agree that sequencing is important as correction around water can have cumulative effect, and we didn't sequence this way early on(when we were just initially teaching cheating singles). The reason we've been doing sequence as stated lately is the pup doesn't cheat, thus not getting corrected. When you only have about an hour a day to train 2 dogs and you're by yourself most of the time, you have to pick and choose what you work on.

The reason I'm still doing the cheating singles is to see if his line will straighten out and not go quite as fat. And on correction/attitude, I very rarely have to correct the pup at all with a collar. He may get 2-3 nicks in an entire week of training. He just typically wants to do the right thing.

If you're not correcting on a cheating single, does it have the negative effect on a dog's attitude or is it just another mark?


----------

