# Hey Lardy folks-



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Am on my second Collar dog and followed Lardys' Total E-.

Things went great, but did something that I absolutely HATE doing. I continued on through CC' the way Lardy has it laid out, however found myself doing something that I do not fully have a grasp on, and I HATE that, and want to fully understand. 
The segment where he burns the dog on SIT, _while_ the dog _is_ SITTING, and referred to it as _indirect_ pressure really threw me off. Then at other times , (while using collar pressure), refers to it as _direct_ pressure. O.K, that officially ----->  me.

To me, it's like pehaps using a HEELING Stick for re-enforcment, (or punishment if you will), and then considering it indirect pressure ..well,..because that's how I want the dog to "see it".

I can't read another sentence on Operant Conditioning, because the more I try to apply it to what Lardys' doing the more fustrated I get. I want to know how it applies.

Believe it could be me just not seeing the woods for the trees, but was wondering if some of you good folks could dumb it down for me, so this simple mind can "get it" .
Thanks.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Swampbilly said:


> To me, it's like pehaps using a HEELING Stick for re-enforcment, (or punishment if you will), and then considering it indirect pressure ..well,..because that's how I want the dog to "see it".


Swamp I'm not sure you meant to say reinforcement = punishment. 

Try this video and see if this perspective enlightens at all. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vel35MIwhrg


----------



## Lynn Hanigan (Dec 14, 2007)

Indirect pressure is not punishment. It is motivation to try harder. I know it seems irrational on the surface but it works very well.
Keep in mind that if you correct a dog while he is running he may not understand what he was doing wrong at the time. However, if you stop his feet it gives him a chance to clear his mind. Then when he receives the correction and the original command is repeated he will respond by trying harder to do it right.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

I watched the video and am glad I did. I'd never seen it before. I think he does a good job overall, through repetition and lots of dialogue, explaining direct versus indirect pressure in different contexts.

I thought that at 4:52, when he explains "indirect pressure", it's not quite the way that I'd personally choose to explain it. It turns out that the dog did not run the initial blind the way J.Paul explained it at 4:52 anyhow, so it is a moot point. 

What I mean by that is that the "indirect pressure" as was explained, involved a sit and a nick as the dog beached, without a preceding command with which the dog chose not to comply. To my mind, giving a sit nick when a dog beached, that long after the intial send would not be the best example of indirect pressure. 

As it turned out, though, J.Paul did run it with a more "textbook" indirect pressure application. The dog was given the cast, the dog refused the cast, J.Paul stopped with a whistle, then gave the nick, then gave the cast again. The dog worked it out and definitely appeared to make the connection and learn something from it.


HNTFSH, thanks for the video link. Never saw it before. I miss seeing J.Paul around. He's one of the more colorful characters in the game.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

I saw the same thing as Chris. My understanding of good use of indirect, is to sit the dog when he goes off line, (water or land) give a correcting cast, and then if he fails, to "Sit -Nick-Cast. I too enjoyed the video and think it would be very helpful for those that have not had an opportunity to watch this in person and learn from a mentor. Thanks for putting it out there, I had never heard of J. Paul. Think I like his stuff though.


----------



## Darin Brewer (Jan 25, 2012)

I believe J Paul does a nice job there explaining the "full" concept of indirect, I believe that Mike also explains it fairly similar in TRT on disc 2 (I believe it's disc 2). The video is a god explanation, k9 contenders has some good videos of others too. Thanks for the video.


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

You'll drive yourself crazy trying to understand or put a label on why certain things work with dogs. Just know that indirect pressure has been used successfully to take many dogs to a very high level of training and they maintained a great attitude.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Charles C. said:


> You'll drive yourself crazy trying to understand or put a label on why certain things work with dogs. Just know that indirect pressure has been used successfully to take many dogs to a very high level of training and they maintained a great attitude.


I agree with this comment. I can remember, and I don't recall exactly where or how Mike words it, that he talks about, in a single segment, all of the various quadrants of conditioning and training that take place. His comments were along the lines that it really doesn't matter too much if you try to identify and label all of the different components of the segment. In the end, it works. Lots and lots of dogs and trainers have come before the program to map out a system that works. 

Many of us want to know exactly how the internal combustion engine functions, whether it have a carb or fuel injection. Many want to know exactly what makes what happen. Others find that it is just as practical to know how to properly operate the equipment and not get into the details.

I think there's no "right" or "wrong". I do think that some of us can advance more smoothly and create better results if we try to understand the umbrella concept and implement it, rather than break it down to bite-size chunks that require "explanation" for each piece.

And no, I'm not in any way implying that this is SwampBilly's intent. 

Happy June 1, 2013 to all of you. I have a certain spouse who is celebrating a birthday today!

Chris


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

All good comments and agree totally on the umbrella understanding. Even keen DVD watchers and people 'trying hard' seem to wrestle grasping the difference. 

Then imagine those that make it up as they go. And there's a gaggle of 'em. 

Couple other nuggets were the factors of the wind to the shoreline hence knowing what to expect the dog to do. Moreover the direct Nic on the Pop and quick explanation on confidence.

Devils always in the detail.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

HNTFSH said:


> Swamp I'm not sure you meant to say reinforcement = punishment.
> 
> Try this video and see if this perspective enlightens at all.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vel35MIwhrg


HNTFSH that's right- certainly didn't mean for that to come out like that!

Thanks for that vid, believe it may be starting to click a little better.

Something I keep reading,..and seeing- and that is, that every time I watch someone use collar pressure (even J.P.), in an example of *direct* pressure, it seems that there's NO command given in conjunction with the pressure, and it's refered to as _direct_ pressure.
Am I making a sound observation on that?

Then,.. when a known command is given, and re-enforced with collar pressure I also see everybody refering to it as _indirect _ pressure.
Am I seeing all of this the way I've described it?

Really appreciate everyones' input. The answer to all of this is right there floating around in my head, but just can't grab it.
It's like trying to remember exactly where ya' parked at Disney World.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Chris Atkinson said:


> What I mean by that is that the "indirect pressure" as was explained, involved a sit and a nick as the dog beached, without a preceding command with which the dog chose not to comply. To my mind, giving a sit nick when a dog beached, that long after the intial send would not be the best example of indirect pressure.


Hey Chris-
Re-read your post here and think you're on to this, but it's just not perfectly clear to me, whether or not he actually *used* pressure, (_without_ a command), once the dog hit the shore.
There was no command, I _know_ that much. But did he use pressure as soon as the dogs' feet hit land?
And again-
What I believe I'm seeing is that *without* a command,.. and then pressure simply coming out of "no-where", ..it's considered direct pressure.
Get me straight if I'm wrong about this. 

Really appreciate everyones' help with this, it's driving me bonkers.

Want to add, that I might be getting caught up in semantics.
To me-
Collar pressure, (no matter what situation the dogs' in and no matter why pressure was used), is direct pressure, kinda' like a loaf of bread-
No matter how you slice it , it's _still_ a loaf of bread.
Seems it's something about a command, (or the lack of), that makes the difference between the terminology, or rather--> _how_ the dog percieves it.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Don't mean to keep ramblin' on, could be the concept is slooowly working it's way in dunno'.

It makes absolutely no sense to me that collar pressure used to re-enforce, (with a learned command for the dog to associate it with), would be punshment.

However, collar pressure _without_ a command at all, (not even a whistle), seems it could be punishment.
If so-
HOW does the dawg know what it's being punished for from a distance!!?? 
Like a re-enforcing tap with the HEELING Stick after a SIT command. And the dog raises his rear end up, and I tap it again without a command.
Now, I know that dog will SIT back down. But from a distance using collar pressure as J.P. did, (or eluded to rather), HOW'S the dog know without a command what the collar pressure was for when/if the dog gets on the shore?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

In my own personal opinion and view of "direct pressure" a command should still immediately precede the application of pressure. I personally avoid ever giving collar pressure unless it is preceded by a command. I believe Mr. Lardy would agree with this concept.

One direct pressure application that I use fairly frequently when I do group walks with four dogs simultaneously is "leave it". This is a universal command to stop sniffing the dead fish and don't roll in it. Get away from the snapping turtle, don't eat that discarded fisherman garbage on the bank, etc. The command "leave it" always precedes the nick. 

Warner Smith (Garmin, formerly Tri-Tronics) recommended a Classic 70 for these group walks. I have found it works great. I tend to set the dial on a 1, 2 or 3. I can direct the stimulation to any of the dogs I'm walking.

In the Mike Lardy collar conditioning video, most all of that pressure application is direct pressure. It is the formalizing of the already known obedience commands in compliance with the collar pressure. "Sit - nick", "here-nick" etc. are used. I believe Mike does also introduce indirect pressure later in that video. (it's been a while since I've watched it) If Mike does, that's done in conjunction with some simple casting drills (ie, "mini t"). 

In my Amish days, I did a fair amount of indirect pressure, without realizing that's the label. The problem was the timing was very poor. Here's an example: I would have suction pulling pup to the right on a blind. I'd stop pup and give a left cast (over, back whatever). Pup would refuse and move right. I'd sit the dog on a whistle, then waddle, walk, run, etc. out to the dog. Then once I reached the dog, I'd issue some sort of correction (verbal, stick pressure, etc). Then move back to the line and repeat the cast. (or maybe not back all the way up to the line, since the dog tends to better take the correct cast when there's less distance between him and handler) The reason I say the timing was poor is that there's a delay between the stop whistle, issued after the improper response to the cast, and when I reached the dog. To my mind, this is the beauty of indirect pressure with collar corrections and part of why it is so effective. The timing can be quite close to the infraction, which appears to transfer much better to the dog's ability to connect the pressure with the incorrect response.

One thing I really like about J. Paul's video that was posted is his discussion of "effort". J. Paul points out that the trainer needs to identify effort or the dog trying as opposed to a lack of effort. If the dog is trying, but just doesn't quite do it right, that probably would not be a good time for any kind of collar pressure at all. 

Direct pressure examples: "Here" with a tug on the lead, "sit" with a tug up on the lead or a tap on the rear with a stick, etc.

I personally avoid collar pressure without a preceding command.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

This is the way it has been explained to me, as I was trying like you to understand why it works. 

As J. Paul said, the reason for indirect is that you have too many possibilities for misplaced associations with direct pressure. If you correct on the beach, the dog may put the correction together with getting out, not with not running a straight line, which is different. Then you have the risk of inadvertently reaching your dog to be nervous about getting out of the water. 

Notice also that indirect pressure will almost always be used in conjunction with "sit," because the dog should immediately recognize the sit whistle and know what to do to turn the pressure off, so it should provide a more stable response to the correction. I don't know how the next part happens, but I know that my dog, like the dog in the video, always responds better and at least gives better effort after an indirect correction like the one in the video. 

For one example, you give your dog a right back and he turns left, which is essentially a cast refusal. You would immediately blow a sit whistle to stop him. If attrition, you would recast. If he again spins left, at that point you would blow a sit whistle - nick - sit. This apparently tells the dog two things: sit, which he understands and complies with, and apparently "Hey, clear your mind and watch what I am directing you to do." Magically, the dog sees my cast and does what I am asking about 90% of the time, but even if he does it wrong again he does it with more effort.

Like Chris says above, this process also makes sure that there is always a command preceding a correction. And the reason I used spinning the wrong way on a back cast is that it is difficult for me to envision a situation (other than the inability to see the cast) in which spinning the wrong way is not a lack of effort.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Swampbilly said:


> HNTFSH that's right- certainly didn't mean for that to come out like that!
> 
> Thanks for that vid, believe it may be starting to click a little better.
> 
> ...


Swamp - in that clip J Paul used the collar twice. Once as Direct when the dog popped (which was impressively timely given he was yakking at us and caught it) to correct the dog directly for spinning around, giving up on a 'back'. There is an important differentiation between correcting on confusion and correcting on effort. That's a whole other discussion but assume the direct Nic was for momentum to continue the command 'back'. 

The second Nic was on Sit. A known command. The dog wasn't Nic'd for hitting the beach in the dogs mind but it's attention was gained. The cast back into the water was then given to put the dog back into the right position to complete the right line to the bird. J Paul describes he doesn't want to make the land 'hot' but rather get the dog off the land and back en route to the pile. Which it did.

The second time the dog lined the blind, of course it became pattern but the route the dog took (minus the pitstop) made the dog successful to the pile. So the second time, the dog learned what route would make it successful again - DESPITE the factors which made the 1st beaching an attractive 'option' for the dog.

He set the dog up to fail essentially so as to work in indirect pressure if the dog did. He didn't want to make the shore 'hot' because there's no lesson there. He did want to set the dog up to be swayed by factors in which the dog might allow them to sway from the correct route. Therefore the dog learned to stay the course against the cheat or temptation but the land never became the issue. Therefore the land was not an issue. This is why he describes what he feel pap may have done the 2nd time if he'd made the shore hot as a correction instead of using indirect pressure - the dog flaring wide of land which would have been a poor line also. 

Keep in mind the dog was through Swim-by and Decheating.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

RookieTrainer said:


> but even if he does it wrong again he does it with more effort.


That made me laugh...


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I too am confused by the Video!

As the dog first starts out, he pops! JPaul gives direct pressure in response to the Pop. (Nick, Back)

Then as the dogs line starts to deteriorate, and the decision is made by the dog to head to land, JPaul says he is "going to help him out".
JPaul gives a sit whistle (No correction) and a cast away from the bank. Dog really doesnt take that cast.. JPaul lets the dog beach, and waits till the dog clearly decides to go up the bank, then gives a whistle sit (I would have given the nick RIght then after the whistle),,, but JPaul,, gives the whistle sit again with a Nick!!

To me,, the dog showed it decided to get dirt,, so right then,(,Sit,Nick, cast) back into the water..
It is,,in my mind still INDIRECT PRESSURE because you Nicked on the sit command,, and followed that Nick with the cast you wanted..

I would not have given the sit whistle again followed by the nick,,as the dog was sitting.. That confused me..

In reality,,,, I probably would have worked on getting the cast away from shore in the first place, and forgot about the blind!

As soon as the dog LOOKED or gave any indication to want dirt,,, I would have blown the whistle, and cast away from shore! as the dog proceeded, if it looked or indicated again it wanted the shoreline I would have whistled and cast away from from again! I would have worked on getting that cast! No correction just attrition, even if I swam the dog a long ways off line from the blind... I want the cast!

There ! Bug in the OIntment!

Gooser


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

HNTFSH said:


> Keep in mind the dog was through Swim-by and Decheating.


Ahh, yes, yes, yes!
HNTFSH *thanks* for that.

Still believe I'm overthinking it when it comes to Lardys' CC' concept, ( with a dog that's not been de-cheated or swimby yet).
A mental block that's not yet been overcome.
And to just quickly grab a snippet of what Chris mentioned:




Chris Atkinson said:


> I'd sit the dog on a whistle, then waddle, walk, run, etc. out to the dog. Then once I reached the dog, I'd issue some sort of correction (verbal, *stick pressure*, etc).


Now Chris complained about the _timing_ of the correction, (which comes with the territiory of non collar), but in the event his P.F Flyers got him there a little quicker, and it was more timely, (and if he did use a stick instead of a audible), I still don't see a difference, whether a command was used or not, between direct and indirect pressure--> the stick _touched_ the dawg. 

God help me, I see it as direct pressure either way 
But I _know_ there's a difference.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

MooseGooser said:


> In reality,,,, I probably would have worked on getting the cast away from shore in the first place, and forgot about the blind!
> 
> As soon as the dog LOOKED or gave any indication to want dirt,,, I would have blown the whistle, and cast away from shore! as the dog proceeded, if it looked or indicated again it wanted the shoreline I would have whistled and cast away from from again! I would have worked on getting that cast! No correction just attrition, even if I swam the dog a long ways off line from the blind... I want the cast!


Given the intent of the clip for distinguishing pressure J Paul prescribed exactly what the dog would do, and it did. I agree with casting back online which was the first cast given after correcting on the pop. The dog stayed wet, albeit hugging the shore. And then beached at a 90 degree angle. This gave the opportunity for J Paul to demonstrate the indirect. 

Had he done otherwise wouldn't the clip have been about keeping the dog on a line? 

It was a little sloppy on the cast refusal and him needing to square the dog back up and at the same time a good video example of a dogs reaction and how to work with it. Most people complain in their training videos the dog does it perfect and theirs don't.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Swampbilly said:


> God help me, I see it as direct pressure either way
> But I _know_ there's a difference.


You still see the collar as a correction or punishment. THAT's the part you have to reconcile.  And trouble differentiating giving pressure on something the dog didn't do 'wrong'.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> Ahh, yes, yes, yes!
> HNTFSH *thanks* for that.
> 
> Still believe I'm overthinking it when it comes to Lardys' CC' concept, ( with a dog that's not been de-cheated or swimby yet).
> ...


Direct Pressure means the pressure occurs at the same timing as the infraction. Ie...dog is walking at heel. You want to use direct pressure on a "sit". You walk dog at heel, while walking, you say "sit" and then immediately follow with a "nick", perhaps while lifting up on a leash, tapping with a stick, etc. That's "Direct" pressure.

Indirect pressure is applied on a command given (and complied with) AFTER the previous command was given and not complied with.

Example: dog is on a point and handler casts dog "over" into water. Dog instead digs back and stays dry. Rather than handler giving an "over" command again, and immediately giving pressure, (Direct). Handler instead stops dog with a sit whistle. Dog turns, sits, and complies with the sit. Handler then gives a nick (indirect) even though pup sat as commanded. The indirect pressure nick on the sit command is for non-compliance with the previously given cast, which pup refused.

Make sense yet?

Forget the stick in my Amish example. The stick has nothing to do with it. The reason I brought up the Amish correction is that I was using indirect pressure (with crummy timing) without understanding it. Dog gets a cast. Dog refuses cast. Dog is given a "sit" whistle, *dog complies with sit whistle*, but handler goes out there and corrects, *not for the sit, which was complied with, but for the previously given command*, which got no effort.

Here is the difference. Indirect pressure involves pressure given after the dog complies with the "sit" command. The dog is given the "sit" command AFTER the dog fails to comply with the command issued previously. The most common example I can think of has to do with cast refusals.

The thing that is tough for some of us (myself included back when I was trying to digest this stuff) is that the dog is complying with the sit whistle, yet he gets corrected. Doesn't that confuse the dog? The answer is that when chained together correctly, the indirect pressure helps clarify to pup that he needs to focus and put forth effort on the command given. 

How does it work? My answer is that it works great! Some want to know how the internal combustion engine works in detail. Others just want to know how to operate it and then go make it run.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Lardy's book states that he looks for behaviors which are lack of effort. These mistakes you look for on the 3 handed casting drill or out in the field. They can be corrected with IP. So you correct on the sit and sequence is "sit" nick "over" and an example Lardy uses is for a dog that freezes when casting and you correct on the sit for cast refusal. (Page 39) He really emphasizes to use this on known commands. DP in my mind can create hot spots when you really don't want so one has to be careful and judicious in their use of the collar. Lately have I have had to revisit this section and carefully go over the use of IP for my dog. I do use the buzz on my Dogtra but am thinking if he ignores the buzz he may need a nick. This is a big step for him, so we are going through the 3 handed casting etc. so he is well versed in the procedure and expectation. This is my interpretation of IP.IMO and hopefully I am interpreting that correctly from the booklet. JP's video was very good and informative. Thanks for sharing it.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Years ago, the late Jerry Harris was helping one of us out to try to grasp the difference between direct pressure and indirect pressure.

Here are his timeless words:








Originally Posted by *Unca Jerry Harris* 




> You send your teenage son to the mailbox. On the way he spots the neighbor’s voluptuous daughter in a bikini (factor). He immediately starts in her direction (succumbing to the factor).
> 
> 
> You yell (whistle) Son!!!!!! (Handle). His eyes get back into focus and turns toward you and says “WHAT??” (responding to the whistle) For the Amish folks, you walk up to him and whop him upside the head!!! (correction=indirect pressure). You then say ‘You were told to go get the mail, now do what you were told!!!
> ...


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Direct Pressure means the pressure occurs at the same timing as the infraction. Ie...dog is walking at heel. You want to use direct pressure on a "sit". You walk dog at heel, while walking, you say "sit" and then immediately follow with a "nick", perhaps while lifting up on a leash, tapping with a stick, etc. That's "Direct" pressure.
> 
> Indirect pressure is applied on a command given AFTER the previous command was given and not complied with.
> 
> ...



Sheesh Chris-
Thanks. (In my most dumbfounded voice).
Dear Lord, that was simple enough! 
I feel really dumb right now.
Got it.

Now get me straight on Stick pressure that you want me to disregard, not sure why. Know that pressure can come from a laundry list of sources, (whether direct or indirect), and to me, no matter what form of pressure it is, each form can change behavior similar to another form, or at least have the same affect.

Can't Stick pressure run kinda' sorta' parallel to Collar Pressure? Know that electricity is different, but have gotten the same result from a tap on the flank as a SIT*tap* SIT as I can a SIT *nick* SIT.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Swamp - not to derail this direct/indirect pressure thing but have seen it complicated by what people perceive a dogs reaction to be either vocally or body language.

My current pup at 1 screams like a banshee. Complete Drama Queen. Must be the Cosmo in him. He was through FF a month and when my daughter came home from college and played with him in the yard and started 'rubbing his ears' he complained...lol. 

Anyway - what's been your experience and more importantly comfort level with pressure, even if just direct? Confidence goes a long way so understand that's why you're asking about this.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> Sheesh Chris-
> Thanks. (In my most dumbfounded voice).
> Dear Lord, that was simple enough!
> I feel really dumb right now.
> ...


Atkinson Response: Yes, absolutely, there are all sorts of ways to communicate to the dog. The stick (or another wonderful one is the ROPE) are great tools through which to communicate with the dog. 

It's really all about communication and shaping behavior, in my opinion.

And yes, the "many" pelts on my wall are what some would consider mere mousetrap results. They're mostly camo colored packed away in boxes, multi-colored, hanging in my kids' bedrooms, or a few minor stake ribbons. I hope nobody thinks I'm trying to tell someone how to make an NFC. I'm just trying to explain my own personal view of "indirect" versus "direct" in the context of M. Lardy's TRT, TECC and TRM stuff.

Chris


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I hope nobody thinks I'm trying to tell someone how to make an NFC.


Doesn't come across that way at all - sure it doesn't to Swamp either.

That said - if you do want to spill that secret sauce - feel free.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

HNTFSH said:


> Swamp - not to derail this direct/indirect pressure thing but have seen it complicated by what people perceive a dogs reaction to be either vocally or body language.
> 
> My current pup at 1 screams like a banshee. Complete Drama Queen. Must be the Cosmo in him. He was through FF a month and when my daughter came home from college and played with him in the yard and started 'rubbing his ears' he complained...lol.
> 
> Anyway - what's been your experience and more importantly comfort level with pressure, even if just direct? Confidence goes a long way so understand that's why you're asking about this.


Too funny^^.(Drama Queen stuff).

Have always used a HEELING Stick, but never used a Choker much- x-cept for those occasional "wild childs' who need some x-tra help. I really, really, like Lardys' employing of three forms, (well,.. 4 if when including audibles or 5 if including an ear pinch if neccessary) , of pressure. It makes for a completely different ball game-and for me, a LOT more manageable in terms of training, and with fewer REPS than before.

Inasfar as indirect pressure,( before collar training), it was hard to get it in there, timely , (from a distance either way) as perhaps the "comes with the territory woes" of non-force. 

Don't know if I answered your question, (and assumed you weren't talking transmitter level), but am confident, (although I did keep moving along with CC-ing as per Lardy without fully understanding a concept), with using pressure. Glory part is there's more tools in the tool box now.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Years ago, the late Jerry Harris was helping one of us out to try to grasp the difference between direct pressure and indirect pressure.
> 
> Here are his timeless words:
> 
> ...


hahahaha...priceless. And exactly why we with voluptuous daughters want all to understand it.


----------



## Brokengunz (Sep 3, 2011)

direct and indirect are simple

direct is a correction for A

indirect dog does A, gets command B and correction.
B "indirectly" effects A.


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

Overly simplified: Direct pressure = force
Indirect Pressure= correction


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Brokengunz said:


> direct and indirect are simple
> 
> direct is a correction for A
> 
> ...


I wonder how something so simple seems to become so complicated and why must we analyze why it works, it works so other than intellectual curiosity who cares. Almost every correction in the field is the application of indirect pressure, i.e. dog makes a mistake, handler blows whistle and pushes button and the dog complies and sits, the only exception being when the dog fails to answer the whistle so when handler pushes button that becomes direct pressure. The truly gifted trainers are the ones whose timing when they apply indirect pressure is perfect thereby shortening the learning curve for the dog, timing is everything.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

HNTFSH said:


> That made me laugh...


If you only knew. I wish I would have had the foresight to video our training sessions. Pair an extremely birdy dog that runs with his hair on fire and a first-time trainer, and a great deal of hilarity has ensued. Ask me how I found out it's not a real good idea to train barefooted.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

MooseGooser said:


> As soon as the dog LOOKED or gave any indication to want dirt,,, I would have blown the whistle, and cast away from shore! as the dog proceeded, if it looked or indicated again it wanted the shoreline I would have whistled and cast away from from again! I would have worked on getting that cast! No correction just attrition, even if I swam the dog a long ways off line from the blind... I want the cast!
> 
> There ! Bug in the OIntment!
> 
> Gooser


I may be misunderstanding what you are saying, but I got a pretty good confirmation yesterday that, at least for my dog, that's not the way to do it. I used to start correcting (used here to mean attrition or pressure) on that look, or any indication that something might be about to go wrong, until I finally figured out that I was reacting too early in most cases. 

My dog showed me this again in a swim-by refresher last week. Almost invariably, when he knows the over bumper is out there, he is going to bend a little that way and give it a couple looks, which he did, but I decided to put my whistle and my transmitter in my pocket and let him commit. And each time what he did was decide to go to the back pile where he was sent.

Of course, I now wonder how many times I have stopped and recast or stopped and used indirect pressure when the dog was actually going to make the correct decision if I had let him roll until he had clearly made either the right decision or the wrong one.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

If you don't give a command, it's a cold burn.
Example, dog beaches early and you push the button.

If you give a command, and reinforce that command with pressure, it is BOTH direct AND indirect pressure at the same time.
You can't apply indirect pressure without also applying direct pressure. And vice-versa. It's not possible.

The difference is what we are doing with it. 

If you are pointing your finger right at the problem with the command you give, that's probably direct pressure.
If you are trying to correct something else, that's probably indirect pressure.

For example, if the dog is rolling on a rotting fish, you could:
(1.) Light the dog up (cold burn).
(2.) Say LEAVE-IT and nick or burn (direct pressure).
(3.) Say HERE and nick or burn (indirect pressure).

Using indirect pressure is "safer" than a cold burn or direct pressure, because the dog isn't looking all over the place for something to "blame it on". 

Because, you have a thoroughly conditioned command-pressure association, that the dog understands very well.

But, they still don't like the pressure. So, in the future, they are very likely going to avoid doing whatever "wrong" thing they were doing at the time that they were indirectly corrected. 

Even when you force a dog out of a pop, you are primarily using indirect pressure. 
Sure, you ARE using direct pressure on the command back. But, you are PRIMARILY using indirect pressure to make the dog less likely to pop in the future.

There does not have to be a refused command, for indirect pressure to be applicable. In fact, those are often the situations that indirect pressure is most useful. When you don't HAVE an enforceable command for exactly what the dog is supposed to do!


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

HNTFSH said:


> Doesn't come across that way at all - sure it doesn't to Swamp either.
> 
> That said - if you do want to spill that secret sauce - feel free.


That's right, I didn't see it that way either.

Yeah-
Please pass the steak sauce ;-)


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I understand JPaul is trying to demomstrate the topic of Indirect pressure with his Video, BUt,

Look at time 5:35 .
JPaul says he is going to help the dog, because clearly the dog is going to dirt. He whistles. gives and right ANGLE back cast. The dog really doesnt take it very well,, and definatly doesnt carry it very far..

So, when Rookie trainer read my post about what In REALITY I would do, I said I would after giving that angle back cast AWAY from shore,, that as soon as the dog even slightly turned its head or thought about going left to dirt, Another whistle,, and another Andle back cast! From them on, I would forget the blind,, and Get that cast, even if it meant swimming the dog way off line of the blind. I want the cast!!

If the dog would have taken JPauls cast at time Mark 5:35, the dog would have been in very good position, and Not got on that point of land. He would NOT have looked up the bank after Jpaul let him beach so as to demonstrate the indirect pressure..

He could have used indirect pressure the same way as when the dog wouldnt take the cast JPaul originally gave, each time the dog looked or even thought about shore,, another whistle,, and another angle back cast, forgetting about the blind,, but using indirect pressure to get the cast!

Am I wrong??

Feel Free!

I'm NOT trying to tell anyone how to make a FC either,, but I think JPaul was more concerened about demonstrating Indirect pressure if the dog beached>>

Gooser


----------



## Brad (Aug 4, 2009)

Ok, I got a question about timing. I think ive been using direct pressure mostly. I seem to blow the whistle and push button at same time.
Do you blow sit whistle and wait till dog turns and sits then nick whistle. (dog has a slow sit)
Lets say in water, would you blow whistle and wait for dog to turn and settle a little, then whistle nick whistle and wait a couple seconds and cast?


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Brad said:


> Ok, I got a question about timing. I think ive been using direct pressure mostly. I seem to blow the whistle and push button at same time.
> Do you blow sit whistle and wait till dog turns and sits then nick whistle. (dog has a slow sit)
> Lets say in water, would you blow whistle and wait for dog to turn and settle a little, then whistle nick whistle and wait a couple seconds and cast?


How come nobody references Lardy's CC book? It is all there.


----------



## Brad (Aug 4, 2009)

Im a slow learner.
And have caused problems, hoping to fix. I don't think he talks about timing? Or does he?
I guess my question was, do you wait till dog turns around and plants but on ground then nick, or blow whistle and push button instantly after whistle. Iwill re read lardys book.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Brad said:


> Im a slow learner.
> And have caused problems, hoping to fix. I don't think he talks about timing? Or does he?
> I guess my question was, do you wait till dog turns around and plants but on ground then nick, or blow whistle and push button instantly after whistle. Iwill re read lardys book.


I/we learned from Rex Carr and you did not wait for completion of the command to apply collar pressure always making sure that the whistle preceeds the collar so that the desired response is a reaction to the whistle and pressure rather than pressure at completion of the task. If the Lardy version differs from that it is hard to argue with success.


----------



## mathewrodriguez (May 11, 2011)

MooseGooser said:


> I understand JPaul is trying to demomstrate the topic of Indirect pressure with his Video, BUt,
> 
> Look at time 5:35 .
> JPaul says he is going to help the dog, because clearly the dog is going to dirt. He whistles. gives and right ANGLE back cast. The dog really doesnt take it very well,, and definatly doesnt carry it very far..
> ...


JPaul opened by stating the dog was young, and not trained on shoreline blinds. What JPaul demonstrated was exactly right. A dog in this early stage of training who doesn't recognize a clearly defined shoreline, should be allowed to make the *complete mistake* of stepping out of the water and getting dry... Then whistle - nick, then give the proper cast to get back in the water. 

Gooser's point on taking the right cast is correct with a more seasoned dog. Generalizing that a young dog should take a cast no matter what... with new factors/concepts is not correct. The concept of staying wet and the temptation of getting out early is more important than the cast in this TEACHING scenario. It's also the appropriate time to use indirect pressure.


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

Brad said:


> Ok, I got a question about timing. I think ive been using direct pressure mostly. I seem to blow the whistle and push button at same time.
> Do you blow sit whistle and wait till dog turns and sits then nick whistle. (dog has a slow sit)
> Lets say in water, would you blow whistle and wait for dog to turn and settle a little, then whistle nick whistle and wait a couple seconds and cast?


What are you trying to accomplish? A correction or are you just forcing the dog on sit?

For a correction(indirect pressure) the "Sit" whistle and the Nick are 2 separate events . The sequence should be "Tweet" followed by a pause until the dog is stopped and looking directly at you, then a nick, then "Tweet"

IMO the object of indirect pressure is 1st stopping the dog to have him focus his attention on you, and the nick tells him that he has done something wrong or that he is not paying attention.

A direct pressure nick/simultaneous nick as a means of correction for a cast refusal or other infraction sends a confusing message . Like I said, indirect pressure redirects the dog's focus back to the handler.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

EdA said:


> I wonder how something so simple seems to become so complicated and why must we analyze why it works, it works so other than intellectual curiosity who cares. Almost every correction in the field is the application of indirect pressure, i.e. dog makes a mistake, handler blows whistle and pushes button and the dog complies and sits, the only exception being when the dog fails to answer the whistle so when handler pushes button that becomes direct pressure. The truly gifted trainers are the ones whose timing when they apply indirect pressure is perfect thereby shortening the learning curve for the dog, timing is everything.


EdA-
I know, I know. You make a good rationalization.
I try to keep the "Why is the sky blue questions" to a minimum.
There's things in this world I can go the rest of my life without knowing- (like the sex life of a jellyfish), but did have to have a better grasp on this one, couldn't stand it any longer


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

After training today, I saw this topic and waded through it. I have to say how frustrated I was reading it. 

Direct and Indirect Pressure are really simple concepts and yet so many can’t seem to get it. It has been explained here on RTF in the past many times (Among others seemy sticky on Dog Learning Science). This post shows all kinds of erroneous interpretations from the Rex Carr original usage of the terms back in the 70’s. Some of the explanations here are quite incorrect.

Unlike many of you, I was very disappointed when I watched the J. Paul video. It is not a good explanation of how Lardy would do it. Not only does J. Paul describe Direct Pressure as a “cold burn”, he illustrates many other procedures that are in strong contrast to those that follow Lardy-the original query by the OP. He nicks on a first pop on a confused dog, he casts with the wrong arm causing a spin, he condones a dog going a long way after a decision to head for shore, he allows a dog to beach before correcting, he accepts an outright cast refusal, he blows a sit whistle when a dog stops in confusion(pop # 2), he repeats a blind back-to-back and more. This is the first video I have seen by him. And yet my own magazine has a Tri-tronics ad featuring him. But I do wonder how come so many of you thought this was a good video?

Pressure does not just come from the e-collar but let’s consider it for this discussion.

Anytime you command and follow with a nick whether concurrently or with a slight delay it is Direct Pressure on that command. Sit nick is Direct Pressure on the sit. Delaying the nick does not make it Indirect. 
Such uses get well-conditioned and understood over time by the dog.
Thus, if you use them for other mis-behaviours such as not taking a cast correctly they can act indirectly. Example, Dog does not take a cast. You blow sit whistle and nick. This is Direct pressure on the Sit. The dog knows how to comply. However,it has an Indirect effect on the casting error if the timing is good-that is at the instant of the mis-behaviour (poor effort to cast by the dog). The dog gets pressure when he made the wrong decision. While it is Direct Pressure on the sit it Indirectly affects the behaviour of the poor cast response. It`s a heavy duty slap in the face (see Jerry). Thus, we call it Indirect Pressure (It is Indirect affecting the casting behaviour)
It is not hot-spot training which J. Paul is advocating by allowing the dog to land! In his example it doesn`t matter what he does, he is correcting for the location-he is not correcting for the behaviour and decision which clearly happened much earlier in the video. Why do you want a young dog to be afraid to land? 

I am not saying that his method is not and cannot be used but I am saying this is not the Lardy or original Rex Carr usage. When you can consistently beat their results let me know.


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

Thanks Dennis.

This whole conversation has been a cluster---!

JS


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Finally. Thanks Dennis.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> He nicks on a first pop on a confused dog,


Mr. Voigt-
It's quite an honor to have you here, and thanks for your interest.
Would very much like to see/read what you're seeing through your professional eyes. Have no mentors, I learn on my own.

When he nicked the dog BACK when the dog popped, do you believe it was perhaps the factors that created initial suction, (confusion) to the shore, or do you believe the dog was confused from the time he made a water entry and swam 5yds.? It seemed to me the initial line deteriorated after about 5yds..
Thanks for your thoughts.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Thanks Dennis.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Dennis, thank you for a great post. 
And for linking it to the classic Jerry Bikini factor!
I just watched the vid.
So...... to branch of a wee bit.
You all know all those threads about the pro and con of running to a big white bucket? 
Do you think it is just happenstance he put his orange ribbon and orange bumpers next to that big white drain pipe??
Or that the dog went to and sniffed it afore picking up the bumper, each time?
a blind placement I do not recomend. In a pond you can drive all the way around he could have had the same wind and bank factor running from big white drain pipe to the point of origin he used. Don't teach your dog to run to white.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

I think this is pretty close to right, and that's also why my post allowed for the explanation of the application of pressure to my dog. For a more seasoned dog, who knew that going toward land was NOT acceptable under any circumstances in that scenario, you wouldn't let him go near as far, and you would and should be a lot more insistent on a straight line. 

In my training session with my pro last Saturday, my dog saw his very first down the shore mark. He initially got into the water where he was supposed to, without cheating, but then proceeded to head out to sea after a decoy - the opposite of J. Paul's situation but just as wrong in the absolute sense. I asked my pro when I should handle him back to the line, and he said not to handle. In this scenario, as long as he was wet and staying wet, at his stage of training that's all you wanted to see. The dog went to the decoy, turned and picked up the bumper, spun away from the bank, and came all the way back in the water, which was what we wanted to see. 6 months from now, when he knows and understands to get in the water and go straight to the bumper and come straight back in the water, it will be totally different. 

I guess I am getting back to reading your dog, including where he is in training and what is going on right at that moment, and only adding pressure as necessary. In that scenario above, a more advanced dog would have been handled and/or corrected for sure and as soon as the dog committed to a wrong decision. With younger less advanced dogs, as my pro explained, you really have to allow them more room to make the decision, because they really are still deciding like my dog in my swim-by example of a couple days ago. If you handle or correct early, you run the risk of correcting when the dog really was going to make the right decision. However, 6 months from now, my decision might be totally different. 

Interesting discussion anyway, and certainly a lot of food for thought. Just so you will know, some of us would like to understand more about how it works as a gateway to understanding how to apply it in different situations and with different dogs in the future, an approach that for me comes from 16+ years in my profession. However, this subject begins to look more and more like one where the answer is "just go with it."



mathewrodriguez said:


> JPaul opened by stating the dog was young, and not trained on shoreline blinds. What JPaul demonstrated was exactly right. A dog in this early stage of training who doesn't recognize a clearly defined shoreline, should be allowed to make the *complete mistake* of stepping out of the water and getting dry... Then whistle - nick, then give the proper cast to get back in the water.
> 
> Gooser's point on taking the right cast is correct with a more seasoned dog. Generalizing that a young dog should take a cast no matter what... with new factors/concepts is not correct. The concept of staying wet and the temptation of getting out early is more important than the cast in this TEACHING scenario. It's also the appropriate time to use indirect pressure.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

RookieTrainer said:


> Interesting discussion anyway, and certainly a lot of food for thought. Just so you will know, some of us would like to understand more about how it works as a gateway to understanding how to apply it in different situations and with different dogs in the future, an approach that for me comes from 16+ years in my profession. However, this subject begins to look more and more like one where the answer is "just go with it."


Guess it's too early to say, but I'm hoping I didn't upset the applecart by asking a question that apparently has been previously asked on here, I really hate wasting space.

Had a significant lack of understanding of why Lardy nicked the dog during CC' _while_ the dog was at SIT, and refered to it as indirect pressure. It simply didn't register, yet there's folks who see it as the most simple concept in the world. 
Apparently I _really am_ an idiot, dunno'.
I saw that it worked, and I wanted to know _why_ and _how_.

All the while every fiber within me saw it as direct pressure, and that's when the nightly insomnia began.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> Guess it's too early to say, but I'm hoping I didn't upset the applecart by asking a question that apparently has been previously asked on here, I really hate wasting space.
> 
> Had a significant lack of understanding of *why Lardy nicked the dog during CC' while the dog was at SIT*, and refered to it as indirect pressure. It simply didn't register, yet there's folks who see it as the most simple concept in the world.
> Apparently I _really am_ an idiot, dunno'.
> ...


Was this segment during a session with casting? Was it to introduce indirect pressure regarding a cast refusal? My hunch is that this is the concept he's referencing or building up to - that the indirect pressure concept gets introduced to help pup understand that the nick on the sit, following the cast refusal is to correct for the improper cast.

Dennis or others, please feel free to correct if you guys feel my attempts at communicating with Swamp are off.

Chris


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

Swampbilly said:


> Mr. Voigt-
> It's quite an honor to have you here, and thanks for your interest.
> Would very much like to see/read what you're seeing through your professional eyes. Have no mentors, I learn on my own.
> 
> ...


 Since I know VERY little about this dog, I won't guess why he popped. My point is that with such an inexperienced dog (maybe this is his first water blind?) the first pop doesn't deserve a e-collar correction. Simply say "back back". That addresses confusion as well as Direct Pressure would. A nick is not going to give him confidence! later if the problem reoccurs and/or becomes chronic address it. I also objected to him casting back with the right arm-should have been left-note how the dog completed a spin. But I know in the heat of the moment we have all done that.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Was this segment during a session with casting? Was it to introduce indirect pressure regarding a cast refusal? My hunch is that this is the concept he's referencing or building up to - that the indirect pressure concept gets introduced to help pup understand that the nick on the sit, following the cast refusal is to correct for the improper cast.
> Chris


Hey Chris-
No, it wasn't a cast refusal, it was the early days of initial CC', basic commands (day 1 or 2).

And our respectable friend Mr. Voigt was a guest speaker 

(Had I'd have been Mr. Voigt, I'd have persueded Lardy to fire up the fireplace and have a few sociables- it looked like a real good time to do it, ) 

Mike had the dog on a checkcord with a choker, using his HEELING Stick, and E-collar together. It was a slooow SIT,.. and explained that he's not burning the dog for complying, ( _for_ sitting), he's doing it because of the previous command that wasn't crisply executed by the dog.

And my lord,.. did that toss a monkey wrench into my thinking big time.


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

Ken Bora said:


> Dennis, thank you for a great post.
> And for linking it to the classic Jerry Bikini factor!
> I just watched the vid.
> So...... to branch of a wee bit.
> ...


I noticed that white pipe right away and wondered if it was planned. If so, he should have said so. I don't mind a small visible marker at the end of a blind with a youngster. The lesson here was a shoreline blind with a cross wind and I wouldn't want to get in a handling battle at a distance with a young dog. I wouldn't be looking to have the white visible from line but as I said we don't know if this dog has had a water blind before, or taught channel blinds. All we know is he has done swim-by and cheating singles what ever that might include in his program.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

I am soooo happy my time spent at the multiple Lardy, Burns, Voigt and Attar Clinics have started to stick....I recognized most of the things that Dennis is pointing out. Allowing the dog to commit to the shore was the biggest stand out. By allowing the dog to commit to go to shore he was in essence telling the dog it was an approved route and then said , "Nope I lied, you can't be there after all" Not very fair to the dog. I also would give the dog a chance , by handling first and then if he blew off the handle, might correct.

I highly recommend people attend some of these seminars . First as an observer, then as a handler. Trying to have someone else translate for you is not very effective



RetrieversONLINE said:


> I noticed that white pipe right away and wondered if it was planned. If so, he should have said so. I don't mind a small visible marker at the end of a blind with a youngster. The lesson here was a shoreline blind with a cross wind and I wouldn't want to get in a handling battle at a distance with a young dog. I wouldn't be looking to have the white visible from line but as I said we don't know if this dog has had a water blind before, or taught channel blinds. All we know is he has done swim-by and cheating singles what ever that might include in his program.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Bridget Bodine said:


> I highly recommend people attend some of these seminars . First as an observer, then as a handler. Trying to have someone else translate for you is not very effective


Roger that.
Some things easier than others.
Came real close last year (?), to going to Cal. for the benefit seminar, (Lardy), but just wasn't consistent enough with my piggy bank to go.


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

Swampbilly said:


> .....
> Had a significant lack of understanding of why Lardy nicked the dog during CC' *while* the dog was at SIT, and refered to it as indirect pressure.
> .....


The timing of the command and the correction ... as I understand it from attending Mike's seminars and as taught to me, and executed by several pros who follow that program ... is NOT a nick while the dog is sitting, but immediately following the command, before the dog gets his butt on the ground. 

The message to the dog is,"you aren't sitting fast enough ... now wake up and pay attention!".

If I'm wrong, then I know a lot of other folks who are also. 

JS


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

Swampbilly said:


> Guess it's too early to say, but I'm hoping I didn't upset the applecart by asking a question that apparently has been previously asked on here, I really hate wasting space.
> 
> Had a significant lack of understanding of why Lardy nicked the dog during CC' _while_ the dog was at SIT, and refered to it as indirect pressure. It simply didn't register, yet there's folks who see it as the most simple concept in the world.
> Apparently I _really am_ an idiot, dunno'.
> ...


The tendency to overthink dog training is strong.

Sit-nik-sit = "Sit"- PAY ATTENTION- "Sit"


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

JS said:


> The timing of the command and the correction ... as I understand it from attending Mike's seminars and as taught to me, and executed by several pros who follow that program ... is NOT a nick while the dog is sitting, but immediately following the command, before the dog gets his butt on the ground.
> 
> The message to the dog is,"you aren't sitting fast enough ... now wake up and pay attention!".
> 
> ...


I don't disagree but what we have learned over the years is that a slow nick ie even after the dog is sitting is still effective when you are using it for Indirect Pressure. I recall discussing this with Mike many years ago. He noted that some of his clients then were always slow but that the dogs seemed to understand the Indirect Pressure and gave good responses. So it is not as critical as one might think. It should however be in the act of the behavior not *before*. Some of you will note how Hillmann does a lot of nicking while the dog is sitting. He calls that reinforcement. He does this a lot but at very low levels. It does strengthen the sit. JS is right that we are looking for a quicker response. That is affected by e-collar intensity, timing, and duration so it's not a simple case of just nicking sooner although that can help a lot (because some dogs perceive the delayed nick as more pressure).


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

This is a great example of why I say you can't train a dog from a video. In order to try and demonstrate this J Paul needed the dog to do certain things. Frankly J Paul would most likely in a typical day of training would have handled the dog away from shore and kept at it. For those of you, like me, that think he should have handled at least once more before the dog beached, what would you have done had the dog just refused to those casts? You could use attrition, but I'm willing to bet most amateurs would get in a fire fight with a dog that wants shore vs water resulting in numerous corrections in water. Remember your hand in the cookie jar training. I would have probably gave one more cast away from shore, then if the dog decides to go to shore and lands, then boom, hand in the cookie jar. Correction for landing and casting off the land. I then can evaluate, I gave the dog more opportunities to do the right thing but also got one correction for his offense on land. Training is a balance, don't correct in water too many times if the goal is stay in water and don't correct on land too many times when the goal is to get on land.

/Paul


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

JS said:


> The timing of the command and the correction ... as I understand it from attending Mike's seminars and as taught to me, and executed by several pros who follow that program ... is NOT a nick while the dog is sitting, but immediately following the command, before the dog gets his butt on the ground.
> 
> The message to the dog is,"you aren't sitting fast enough ... now wake up and pay attention!".
> 
> ...


I'm hoping a couple things JS-
1- That I did miss the critical timing of that to where it appeared that it was almost a cold burn.
2-That I might receive forgiveness from everyone if I *did* 

Going to stick my head back in that particular segment later on with a fine toothed comb.


----------



## knash3 (May 17, 2012)

To the OP question, my simple view of message to dog in Direct vs. Indirect pressure:
*Direct = "Do this"* (Back-nick, here-nick, over-nick, fetch-nick)
*Indirect = "Don't do that"* (handler responds to cast refusal with sit-nick, then repeating cast)


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Bridget Bodine said:


> Allowing the dog to commit to the shore was the biggest stand out. By allowing the dog to commit to go to shore he was in essence telling the dog it was an approved route and then said , "Nope I lied, you can't be there after all" Not very fair to the dog. I also would give the dog a chance , by handling first and then if he blew off the handle, might correct.


Doesn't this depend on the dog and the training? If we are talking about the initial lesson, which is get wet and stay wet, then really the only wrong decision there is to get dry, isn't it? Hence the reason my pro said what he said about my dog Saturday, which was as long as he stays in the water don't even handle, much less give a correction.

If the dog is already schooled to get wet and stay wet, then it seems to me your conclusion is exactly right. Now we are asking the dog not only to get wet and stay wet, but go in a straight line without much foolishness, which seems to me me to require earlier handling/corrections as you said above.

So much to learn. I wish I was not as addicted to this crazy mess as I seem to be. But I am glad some of you folks are too and are willing to discuss things with a rank amateur such as myself.


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

knash3 said:


> To the OP question, my simple view of message to dog in Direct vs. Indirect pressure:
> *Direct = "Do this"* (Back-nick, here-nick, over-nick, fetch-nick)
> *Indirect = "Don't do that"* (handler responds to cast refusal with sit-nick, then repeating cast)


That's a interesting way of looking at it. However, do not forget that many other techniques are geared to *"Don't do that". *For example yelling NO and burning or simply cold burning are also designed to say *"Don't do that!" *Both are examples of punishment (Stopping a behavior) rather than reinforcement (Increasing a behavior). Both are not good examples of Indirect Pressure in that they are likely to have other consequences. Neither give the dog much information except *STOP!* In Indirect Pressure usage we always try to tell the dog to do something(like SIT!). The Direct Pressure on Sit acts indirectly to increase the desired behavior(the cast). Used this way, Indirect pressure is Negative reinforcement not Punishment like *NO* Nick. I too like to keep it simple but sometimes simple isn't so easy


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

RookieTrainer said:


> Doesn't this depend on the dog and the training? If we are talking about the initial lesson, which is get wet and stay wet, *then really the only wrong decision there is to get dry, isn't it? *Hence the reason my pro said what he said about my dog Saturday, which was as long as he stays in the water don't even handle, much less give a correction.
> 
> If the dog is already schooled to get wet and stay wet, then it seems to me your conclusion is exactly right. Now we are asking the dog not only to get wet and stay wet, but go in a straight line without much foolishness, which seems to me me to require earlier handling/corrections as you said above.
> 
> So much to learn. I wish I was not as addicted to this crazy mess as I seem to be. But I am glad some of you folks are too and are willing to discuss things with a rank amateur such as myself.


See bold---Not quite--- the wrong decision is when the dog "*decides"* to head to shore. He is likely to still be very wet! Sometimes that takes awhile to read other times it is obvious. I agree with Brigitte that you don't want a dog to make a wrong decision and condone it by letting him carry on for a long time and then lowering the boom. The best time to change a dog's mind plus have him understand why you intervened is the instant the dog made a wrong decision. Then you can correct if he doesn't take your cast. The purpose of your early cast is to teach him to go straight and not make a decision to deviate to an easier way out. So when I am training I don't "hope" he will head to shore as J. Paul says. Instead, I simply set up a situation where he has to deal with factors. Then when he makes a decision to not fight the factors, I can tell him the correct way. So I don't *hope* he'll land or even go straight or not. I only *hope to "teach" him the desired behavior which is go straight*-fight the factors. In teaching a youngster to go straight around water they often get a little too watery. But my goal is not "get wet and stay wet". My goal is teach "go straight". Some days that means a lesson in "get wet and stay wet"-other days it may mean "get on that point". BALANCE!


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Like I said in my earlier posts. I think Jpaul just got wrapped up in showing what Indirect pressure would be like if the dog got on shore.

His main goal was that explanation, and a Video.
In real life though, when he decided early to " Help the dog", and then got a poor response to that angle back cast, and then ignored that poor rsponse and let the dog beach, I feel, was a mistake!

Like I said, IMHO once you decide to Handel, ang get a cast refusal, In training, the blind is over, and you work on getting the cast.

JPaul could have shown indirect pressure after that cast refusal just as easily by us using a whistle, nick , cast away from shore.


JMHDAO

Gooser


----------



## knash3 (May 17, 2012)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> That's a interesting way of looking at it. However, do not forget that many other techniques are geared to *"Don't do that". *For example yelling NO and burning or simply cold burning are also designed to say *"Don't do that!" *Both are examples of punishment (Stopping a behavior) rather than reinforcement (Increasing a behavior). Both are not good examples of Indirect Pressure in that they are likely to have other consequences. Neither give the dog much information except *STOP!* In Indirect Pressure usage we always try to tell the dog to do something(like SIT!). The Direct Pressure on Sit acts indirectly to increase the desired behavior(the cast). Used this way, Indirect pressure is Negative reinforcement not Punishment like *NO* Nick. I too like to keep it simple but sometimes simple isn't so easy


Dennis, I'm trying to describe a useful, if not sufficient, distinction between direct and indirect pressure. It's the start of an understanding, not the entire story. Not suggesting a correction using indirect pressure is the only "don't do that" message, nor are all 4 legged animals cows. If you view the entire sequence of "Sit"-nick, cast" as a correction using indirect pressure, I suppose the more verbose message is "Don't do that, do this". I hear you re the goal being reinforcement by increasing the compulsion to respond correctly vs punishment for the (willfully) incorrect response. Please excuse my extreme oversimplification.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> Anytime you command and follow with a nick whether concurrently or with a slight delay it is Direct Pressure on that command. Sit nick is Direct Pressure on the sit. Delaying the nick does not make it Indirect.[/SIZE]


Mr. Voigt-
Thanks again for your time here.
Quick question:
If I had a dog 10yds. away and had a 30ft. long HEELING Stick that could reach out there,..and I give the dog a verbal SIT then*_tap_* SIT, isn't that _direct pressure?_, same concept similar to collar pressure?
Just a different way of applying it(?)
(Please say yes, LoL!  )


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

Swampbilly said:


> Mr. Voigt-
> Thanks again for your time here.
> Quick question:
> If I had a dog 10yds. away and had a 30ft. long HEELING Stick that could reach out there,..and I give the dog a verbal SIT then*_tap_* SIT, isn't that _direct pressure?_, same concept similar to collar pressure?
> ...


YES! Direct pressure on Sit. Might have Indirect Pressure effects on something else. Like suppose he was whining. PS Hint, the dog could be 1 foot away and you had a 3 foot heeling stick! Sit swat would be Indirect Pressure for whining. PPS Gone training!!!


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

I agree totally, but we come back to why it is difficult to talk with any authority about things you didn't see - you have to know when the dog actually decided, as you say. In the setup we used it would not have been two seconds after he decided to beach (if he would have done that) until he would have been on land, and clearly not where he was supposed to be, and a correction would have been appropriate and understood. And your last sentence makes a lot of sense - that day with my dog the sum total of the lesson was get wet and stay wet. Once we have that clearly established, it will be get wet and stay wet while going in a straight line to the mark. Otherwise, at least to this rookie, you are chasing too many things at one time to be effective at correcting any of them.



RetrieversONLINE said:


> See bold---Not quite--- the wrong decision is when the dog "*decides"* to head to shore. He is likely to still be very wet! Sometimes that takes awhile to read other times it is obvious. I agree with Brigitte that you don't want a dog to make a wrong decision and condone it by letting him carry on for a long time and then lowering the boom. The best time to change a dog's mind plus have him understand why you intervened is the instant the dog made a wrong decision. Then you can correct if he doesn't take your cast. The purpose of your early cast is to teach him to go straight and not make a decision to deviate to an easier way out. So when I am training I don't "hope" he will head to shore as J. Paul says. Instead, I simply set up a situation where he has to deal with factors. Then when he makes a decision to not fight the factors, I can tell him the correct way. So I don't *hope* he'll land or even go straight or not. I only *hope to "teach" him the desired behavior which is go straight*-fight the factors. In teaching a youngster to go straight around water they often get a little too watery. But my goal is not "get wet and stay wet". My goal is teach "go straight". Some days that means a lesson in "get wet and stay wet"-other days it may mean "get on that point". BALANCE!


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

That's a interesting way of looking at it. However, do not forget that many other techniques are geared to *"Don't do that". For example yelling NO and burning or simply cold burning are also designed to say "Don't do that!" Both are examples of punishment (Stopping a behavior) rather than reinforcement (Increasing a behavior). Both are not good examples of Indirect Pressure in that they are likely to have other consequences. Neither give the dog much information except STOP! In Indirect Pressure usage we always try to tell the dog to do something(like SIT!). The Direct Pressure on Sit acts indirectly to increase the desired behavior(the cast). Used this way, Indirect pressure is Negative reinforcement not Punishment like NO Nick. I too like to keep it simple but sometimes simple isn't so easy


Except in circumstances when "cold burn" promotes correct behavior,,meaning cold burn equals dog doing desired behavior or " do this" Which has a lot to do with how the dog has been conditioned. What the dog is thinking at the time is critical. 
which takes you back to the old adage there are no absolutes not even in taxes, death or dog training,,,, 
The only absolutes I know of are recorded in the bible.*


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

I've always understood that direct pressure is applied until compliance is achieved, then immediately removed.
Indirect pressure is a consequence for failing to comply.


----------



## forhair (Feb 4, 2013)

As a novice dog-training outsider looking in I don’t mind adding my thoughts. In my profession I have developed many of the procedures, instruments, and protocols. More or less, it did not exist so I invented it. I’m an international authority. Never the less, routinely someone with similar experience not to mention less experience teaches me something. Thus, as an outsider I look to the experienced individual for depth of knowledge, but I never discount other opinions from those less experienced. This is not to misconstrue that someone should trust my dog training knowledge. I'm simply adding an opinion. 

J. Paul wished to demonstrate a concept. I doubt anyone feels he could not have been more aggressive in maintaining his line, yet I’ve seen Lardy tapes where the dog is far more off line, but often the dog makes the correction without influence. Here we are talking about perhaps 20 degrees. At the point the dog gets out of the water, the dog could still have made the correction rather than making a 90 degree turn to the shore. Yes, one could be more proactive, but with so little margin for error, I can see the handler electing to allow the dog to make the decision. I guess one could say that it’s better to handle sooner simply because once you allow that little margin for error, you don’t have the time to correct because the mistake is instantaneous and there is nothing you can do other than use indirect pressure. Perhaps this is exactly what J.Paul wished to demonstrate. Perhaps he encouraged it. 

What was the resulting response? The dog ran a water blind straight to the white water pipe in the next run. In other words J. Paul got exactly what he wanted. Perhaps there is more than one way to teach a dog. The day we stop believing that there a better way or an alternative way to do things is the day we stop advancing. I don’t care what profession you are in. 

In my own experience when I have a dog that is within 15 degrees of making the wrong decision, do I correct him or do I let him work it out? Often the margin of error is less than 20 feet. If I don’t correct, I’ll not have time to stop his forward momentum. Often, this works against me as the dog makes the wrong decision. In many of the Lardy videos, the dog is perhaps over 50 yard out and 45 degrees off, yet the dog is not corrected and still the dog works it out. Should we be more aggressive when the margin of error is less? 

Certainly, I see concerns with this video such as setting a blind next to a white pipe, casting with the wrong arm on the pop, perhaps nicking at the time of the pop, and not correcting sooner on the shore bound line. Then after the indirect pressure off the water exit and sit, the dog took the wrong line on shore and stopped without a whistle Why? 

Still it worked and on the next run, the dog hit the white pipe perfectly. 
The way I see it is that J. Paul set out to demonstrate something and it played out exactly as he planned. I’m not saying it’s optimal, but how can you fault a guy for getting exactly what he expected to happen especially when the dog performed flawlessly in the next run.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Well folks-
Ya'll put your hands together while saying "Yaaay".

I got this.
Lol 

Thanks for everyones' input!


----------



## cubdriver (Jan 1, 2006)

JS said:


> The timing of the command and the correction ... as I understand it from attending Mike's seminars and as taught to me, and executed by several pros who follow that program ... is NOT a nick while the dog is sitting, but immediately following the command, before the dog gets his butt on the ground.
> 
> The message to the dog is,"you aren't sitting fast enough ... now wake up and pay attention!".
> 
> ...


This is what I try to do and what I believe that Lardy is advocating and that is the timing of the 'sit' command and the nick. I try to give the nick after the whistle and before the dog has completely reached the sit position. It isn't easy to anticipate when the dog will hear the 'sit' whistle so that the nick can be given before the dog's action is completed but if you are carefully watching the dog you can nick as you observe the dog starting to react to the 'sit'. I would amplify this by saying that I had a dog who had major hearing loss prior to three years of age and didn't know it. Beyond 50 yards, I later found out that the dog couldn't hear a whistle. That meant that any time the dog was beyond that distance I was always unknowingly giving direct pressure with a 'nick' as the dog couldn't hear the whistle. Eventually I began getting some popping, which I started to correct with a 'back' , 'nick', back'; again this turned out to be direct pressure. This led to more popping. After I discovered the hearing loss, it took me a LONG time to move past the pops. Following that experience I always try to time the correction before the sit action is completed in order to truly give indirect force.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

cubdriver said:


> Beyond 50 yards, I later found out that the dog couldn't hear a whistle. That meant that any time the dog was beyond that distance I was always unknowingly giving direct pressure with a 'nick' as the dog couldn't hear the whistle. Eventually I began getting some popping, which I started to correct with a 'back' , 'nick', back'; again this turned out to be direct pressure. This led to more popping. After I discovered the hearing loss, it took me a LONG time to move past the pops. Following that experience I always try to time the correction before the sit action is completed in order to truly give indirect force.


Oh crap-
Sorry to hear of your dogs' hearing loss, goes without saying you obviously had your hands full getting all of that straightened out.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

cubdriver said:


> This is what I try to do and what I believe that Lardy is advocating and that is the timing of the 'sit' command and the nick. I try to give the nick after the whistle and before the dog has completely reached the sit position. It isn't easy to anticipate when the dog will hear the 'sit' whistle so that the nick can be given before the dog's action is completed but if you are carefully watching the dog you can nick as you observe the dog starting to react to the 'sit'. I would amplify this by saying that I had a dog who had major hearing loss prior to three years of age and didn't know it. Beyond 50 yards, I later found out that the dog couldn't hear a whistle. That meant that any time the dog was beyond that distance I was always unknowingly giving direct pressure with a 'nick' as the dog couldn't hear the whistle. Eventually I began getting some popping, which I started to correct with a 'back' , 'nick', back'; again this turned out to be direct pressure. This led to more popping. After I discovered the hearing loss, it took me a LONG time to move past the pops. Following that experience I always try to time the correction before the sit action is completed in order to truly give indirect force.


 You still don't get it. Your dog was getting a COLD BURN, there was no direct pressure because there was no command to accompany the correction. He was getting zapped for NO apparent reason to him.
It would have been direct pressure if he heard a command.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

picture this . Your dog is on a point of land, you have given an "Over" command. He does not take it, you blow the whistle and give another "Over" command. He does not take it. Instead of using "Over" nick ( direct pressure) I am going to use "Sit" nick (indirect pressure) and then give another "over" with no correction on over


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

Bridget Bodine said:


> You still don't get it. Your dog was getting a COLD BURN, there was no direct pressure because there was no command to accompany the correction. He was getting zapped for NO apparent reason to him.
> It would have been direct pressure if he heard a command.


*BB* 

Unfortunately, if you reference the J. Paul video, he clearly defines Direct Pressure as a COLD BURN-no command just zap. This was my major objection to his explanation.Well I guess one could define it that way because it is certainly direct! However, as we have learned, commands in almost all situations (but not all!) should precede a correction. Thus, the conventional definition of Direct Pressure is a command followed by a nick. In any case, it is not surprising that cold burns cause pops. 

I see folks struggling with two other ideas in this thread. 

One is the timing after the command. It is not as critical as most think. 

What is more important is the timing of the intervention (the command). 

Someone talked about a dog being within 15 degrees of a decision. Not sure what that means but I do know *the issue IS NOT whether the dog is off-line or not. The issue is whether the dog deviated or refused a command.* More precisely, the issue is the *decision to deviate or to refuse command*. Those are the reasons for intervention with pressure. You don't intervene with pressure just because a dog is off line. This seems to be an elusive idea for some!


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> *BB*
> 
> Unfortunately, if you reference the J. Paul video, he clearly defines Direct Pressure as a COLD BURN-no command just zap. This was my major objection to his explanation.Well I guess one could define it that way because it is certainly direct! However, as we have learned, commands in almost all situations (but not all!) should precede a correction. Thus, the conventional definition of Direct Pressure is a command followed by a nick. In any case, it is not surprising that cold burns cause pops.
> 
> ...


For me, personally, I don't correct or use pressure for the dog making a mistake. Being offline is a mistake (often times because of the handler if truth be told) but in line with your comments its about did the dog deliberately refuse a command. This is why in the J Paul video I said I would have at least given another cast or two away from shore and seeing the dogs reaction to those casts before correction/pressure gets applied. 

/Paul


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> For me, personally, I don't correct or use pressure for the dog making a mistake. Being offline is a mistake (often times because of the handler if truth be told) but in line with your comments its about did the dog deliberately refuse a command. This is why in the J Paul video I said I would have at least given another cast or two away from shore and seeing the dogs reaction to those casts before correction/pressure gets applied.
> 
> /Paul


100% agree with you. You don't correct a dog for making mistakes , everybody is allowed to makes [email protected]!! You correct a dog for lack of effort. ( read effort as doing what he wants to do rather than what you are asking him to do)
COLD BURNS have no place in my retriever training regime , it is a lightning strike with no info on why it happened


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Dennis the 15% was I think being offline. You and I (and I hope some others ) read the dog in the video as having made the decision to beach long before he actually touched land, I would guess he was 20 yards out when I read him as heading for land. At that point we would have blown a whistle ( NO correction ) and Handled to the mark. IF he scalloped back to land , "Toot" and another handle ( may or may not correct ON THE TOOT, depending on the level and history of the dog) .
For the people trying to learn , Reading the dog is an art, you watch for little head cocks, ear laybacks ( shows he is thinking), slight turns either way, repeated bending toward the beach and the most obvious head straight for the beach. This dog was heading straight for the beach and the handler let him go, telling him everything is cool , you are going the right way. And then said NOPE after he beached. Now this very well could have been JUST to demonstrate what he wanted to say, but in my regular training program I would never lie to the dog , and then correct him for what I allowed him to do...!!
To your significant other , " Honey , can you take the trash out?" 10 minutes later "Why the hell did you do that, I was goona put more stuff in?!! Dumb ****..."


----------



## forhair (Feb 4, 2013)

I agree with your assessment whole-heartedly, Bridgette. One would expect an experienced trainer to handle sooner simply to avoid the landing temptation. At the point the dog diverted 90 degrees to land, the dog was still on an acceptable line, but the parallel shore was just to tempting to this young dog. Still it seemed to work. 

Anyway, I’m not going to play the devils advocate any further. Let me ask you this. As an inexperienced handler I periodically run into this sort of problem. I ran a triple blind today with a poison bird. I set the poison bird up improperly and shot it out of a Zinger rather obtuse in angle such that it landed with a thump. Poor thing was expelling fluid on the return. Anyway, the location of landing screwed up the entire test, but I said no to the dog, moved him to the left and ran him toward a blind that was out of the line to the stunned live bird, but they were close in terms of angle. My dog took off on the right line. Then he began to deviate toward the live bird. I stopped him and corrected without pressure. Unfortunately, by now he was so close to the poison bird that he had it before I could react other than to whistle a stop that he ran through. Rookie mistake, of course, but that’s what rookies do. At that point, I did not stun him. I just let the dog make the return and then ran the blinds. Let’s say you have close marks or blinds and the dog makes a sudden deviation to the wrong one. Before you know it, he’s running through the whistle and takes the wrong mark or blind. He has it in his mouth now. What do you do? Do you back up and run simpler tests or is there a proper correction here. 
Now, my second dog skipped the poison bird and hit the blind. Perhaps the handler learned something. 

Anyway this sort of thing happens to me from time to time on tight lines where the dog makes the mistake so fast on the short bird that I’m left flat footed sort of like how Notre Dame was against Alabama in the BCS this year. Now, I don’t always get the wrong response, but I don't know how to manage it when I do. 

I like your honey and the trash. Mine was always my mom asking me if I wanted anything to eat while I was focused on something else. I’d say sure without thinking. Then when she showed up with a plate of food, I’d say, why did you make that? You hear the stimulus, but you don’t process it correctly so you end up with something unwanted. The correction is you have to eat it.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

You blow it off and try it again another time. The biggest thing is if YOU make a mistake , THE dog does not pay for it. If you set up was screwed up and you recognized it before running it , I would have changed the lesson plan for the day or called a no bird and reset the mark.
If he was close to the poison bird you might have whistled him IN 20-30 yds on the second cast ( attrition) and then cast. It sounds like you gave a hail Mary cast and Mary did not respond...


----------



## forhair (Feb 4, 2013)

Awesome advice. I guess it was a hail Mary, but i threw the ball to the defender. Thanks. Actually, i do always blow it off and reset to a different address with a similar theme the next day and the dogs seem to get it. I have not tried calling them back, which i think is sage advice.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

You can't correct before the dog has made the "lack of effort". 
When the dog has made a "lack of effort", it's not US that has to know. It's the DOG that has to know.

This is key. Even with what Pete refers to when he says;


> *Except in circumstances when "cold burn" promotes correct behavior,,meaning cold burn equals dog doing desired behavior or " do this" Which has a lot to do with how the dog has been conditioned.*


If the dog knows exactly what the pressure MEANS, it absolutely will understand the correction. Cold burn, direct, or indirect. But when the dog doesn't have the education and conditioning in place, you have to fall back on what the dog KNOWS.

And that's where indirect pressure really comes into play. 

The dog HAS TO understand pressure to go, pressure to stop, and pressure to come. If the dog understands those key things, there are not very many circumstances where you CAN'T apply indirect pressure. But if it doesn't, you simply do not have the foundation to be able to apply indirect pressure.

Remember, indirect and direct pressure happen at the same time. 
What makes them possible, is the dog understanding the pressure as reinforcement of a known command/behavior. 
Without that understanding, EVERYTHING that you do with pressure equates to a cold burn.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

copterdoc said:


> Remember, indirect and direct pressure happen at the same time.
> What makes them possible, is the dog understanding the pressure as reinforcement of a known command/behavior.
> Without that understanding, EVERYTHING that you do with pressure equates to a cold burn.


Enjoyed your post 'Doc.



You know, of all the different forms of pressure in the world and the source from which they come- I truely believe that your _voice_, (the tone of it), can shut 'em down just as quickly or easily as any other form of pressure when it becomes overwhelming to the dog.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

Swampbilly said:


> ...You know, of all the different forms of pressure in the world and the source from which they come- I truely believe that your _voice_, (the tone of it), can shut 'em down just as quickly or easily as any other form of pressure when it becomes overwhelming to the dog.


 Pressure is aversive influence. 
By aversive, I mean that the dog finds the stimulus unpleasant and seeks to avoid it.

By influence, I mean that it's presence causes the dog to change it's behavior.

Dogs are unique. Like snowflakes.
Some dogs are seemingly numb to certain forms of pressure, while others react to the same form of pressure like you just poured acid into an open wound.

I promise that there are lots of dogs that will not perceive a voice correction as aversive or influential. Let alone be overwhelmed and "shut down" in response to it.

And BTW, when a dog "shuts down" in response to pressure, it's telling you that it does NOT understand it. 
Regardless of what form of pressure it is.


----------

