# Get your mark cue



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

I have just started trying this when it looks like my dog isn't focused on getting a memory bird. He hears the word mark and I guess he thinks the mark is going to be thrown again. I'm sure it helps him know we are not running a blind and I send him like it is a memory bird which it is. Do most people start this cue when they first start doubles and do it for every memory bird or just the ones a dog doesn't remember? Some people use the word watch, so that would put them in a different situation? How does this cue work?


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I use a different word. "Remember". That and lining him up on the bird. Seems to trigger his memory. Most of the time.


----------



## Pam Spears (Feb 25, 2010)

I "ask" my dog, "Where's your mark?" She stops looking for another thrown mark and usually locks in on the memory bird. Not very scientific, but it works for us, LOL.


----------



## weathered (Mar 17, 2011)

I ask "Where's your bird?" When I line them up on the bird I want them to focus on. I use "watch" for them to look out for marks that will be falling.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Thanks, I am going to stop using it with the word mark in it. I think he isn't sure another mm ark went off somewhere and it is giving me bigger hunts. I may just keep saying nothing.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

I don't say anything if it's a mark . 
I turn towards each one though and expect the dog to be with me .


----------



## A team (Jun 30, 2011)

polmaise said:


> I don't say anything if it's a mark .
> I turn towards each one though and expect the dog to be with me .


Spot on. 

Dog runs back from getting the first mark, is already looking at the direction of the memory mark, dog will usually line itself up on the mat, confirm to the dog "good dog , that's it" and send the dog. fuss with them too much and you creat doubt. 

Let em rip and talent takes over.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

If it's a memory bird, not retired, and dog appears fuzzy... I'll say mark to help him remember.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

captainjack said:


> If it's a memory bird, not retired, and dog appears fuzzy... I'll say mark to help him remember.


You can do what You want .
Sometimes helping him is not helping him mark.;-)
Anyhow ...If the dog appears fuzzy then perhaps there is something not clear.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

polmaise said:


> You can do what You want .
> Sometimes helping him is not helping him mark.;-)
> Anyhow ...If the dog appears fuzzy then perhaps there is something not clear.


You're clearly a better trainer and have better dogs than I do. My dogs do not pin 100% of their marks. Must be nice to never ever not been the winner of the trials you run. Congrats!


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

on the thought that helping is not helping - I can see polmaise's point.
perhaps so much cueing creates a dog dependent on being assisted in remembering.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

polmaise said:


> You can do what You want .
> Sometimes helping him is not helping him mark.;-)
> Anyhow ...If the dog appears fuzzy then perhaps there is something not clear.


I had a dog once who was a spectacular marker, but every once in a while he blanked out on a bird. When that happened he was way past fuzzy, he just thought he was done, there was no amount of lining or cueing I could do to get him to remember the mark. Some dogs can be lined out there, and if run far enough and hold that line, they might luck out find the holding blind and work it out, not my Yoda though. If he forgot, he was sure he was done, thankfully that was a rare occurrence.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I think some people don't understand how to use cues, or how to teach them consistently. Too much talking, too much fussing, backfires, but the right cue, taught properly, used consistently, works to communicate something to the dog. Same as tone of voice and use of hand down, or no hand, depending on the mark. Plenty of successful handlers don't use any verbal cues (other than tone of voice), plenty do, it is simply a preference in training. But it has to be done right, to be effective.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Cueing a dog is not always about helping them mark or remembering a mark. It's mainly part of a routine or raport you have developed with the dog. Dogs have a keen understanding of cues, subtle or overt, and rely on them. 
For marks specifically folks use different words, all can work. 
Showing guns: mark, no here, right there, easy, retired, way back, sit, watch. 
After signaling: cues from feet, knees, legs, 
Picking up: body cues as above, mark, good, right there, easy, retired, no here, way back


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Use placement of your feet when a dog returns to heel with a bird. With a younger dog you can heel further back and walk up to the correct placement before delivering the bird. I'm not a big fan of "where's your bird". Work as a team and don't ask.


----------



## swliszka (Apr 17, 2011)

Polmaise X 2...KISS ! The problems are too much e-collar over-reliance, poor positive behavioral understanding implementation , consistent pup to adult unique cuing, using truck/pro method training so a dog passes through similar teaching multiple hands. Ask yourself, can you/siblings or your biological offspring flourish with similar learning/performance methods? IMO


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Breck said:


> Cueing a dog is not always about helping them mark or remembering a mark. It's mainly part of a routine or raport you have developed with the dog. Dogs have a keen understanding of cues, subtle or overt, and rely on them.
> For marks specifically folks use different words, all can work.
> Showing guns: mark, no here, right there, easy, retired, way back, sit, watch.
> After signaling: cues from feet, knees, legs,
> Picking up: body cues as above, mark, good, right there, easy, retired, no here, way back


This is more like the way I learned it, rightly or wrongly, from Dave Rorem.

In a field trial scenario where you start by letting dog pick out the gunners, the "mark" cue is used to instill extra memory in the dog's head for the key bird before you call for the birds; this could be the long punch bird or the short retired, depending on the setup and your dog's strengths, weaknesses. 

I know lots of very successful amateurs that use various cues quite successfully---they have multiple FC/AFCs, yearly high point AA dogs, etc. So obviously being able to communicate with dog goes a long way.

Apologies to Dave Rorem if I am misremembering his lesson.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

DL said:


> How does this cue work?


Pretty simple actually - dogs are good at patterns. If they hear the same set of words and see the same body postures over and over just before being sent to retrieve they know the pattern.

If you are a good enough trainer to build a behavior into the sequence BEFORE the words are used, they can be very effective at helping the dog continue that behavior until released. 

I taught my last dog to stare at objects, which I acknowledge with the "good" cue. Now, when we head to the line for either a blind or a mark and she looks where I want her to look (without prompting from me), I simply say "good" and she locks onto that spot. She does this because she knows when I say "good" something is about to happen where she's looking OR I'll release her to go get what she's looking at (a visible bumper, for instance). She's automatically scanning because she knows the holding blind to line sequence also. 

Everything your dog does with you is pattern oriented. The good, bad and ugly are all pattern oriented. Setting up good repetitive patterns is dog 101.

Most of what I do in behavior modification work is actually undoing patterns creating by unwitting owners who thought they were doing the right thing and either weren't observant enough or didn't have the knowledge to realize. 

Great example - prior client of mine with a male Akita just got a new puppy. They told me that a certain downhill spot on their walk the male will harass the female. So, after I observed the dog's behavior together for about 20 minutes we went for a walk. Turns out that on the downhill section the puppy speeds up and moves somewhat erratically trying to negotiate the terrain. I had noticed (and not commented yet) that every time the puppy runs around fast the male will try and stop her by running her down and biting at her legs (not hard). The problem pattern existed in the dog's behavior in places other than the hill but the client didn't notice. We could have solved the hill problem by having the male sit and wait at the top but... it would not have solved the overall problem of him harassing the pup when it was trying to play/chase. It was obvious to the clients that it happened in that one spot and they were wondering what it was about the location. Turns out it's not the location at all but rather the adult dog trying to control the puppy. 

So a bit off topic but the example is there. Dogs are extremely pattern oriented. Create good, thoughtful patterns and your dog will learn what you want. Miss a problematic one or worse yet encourage it and you'll have to break a bad habit later. This is most often how dogs get labelled "stubborn".

Use your "mark" cue right and it can be very effective. Use it incorrectly or inconsistently and it can be everything from neutral to detrimental in your dog's performance.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

DarrinGreene said:


> Pretty simple actually - dogs are good at patterns. If they hear the same set of words and see the same body postures over and over just before being sent to retrieve they know the pattern.
> 
> If you are a good enough trainer to build a behavior into the sequence BEFORE the words are used, they can be very effective at helping the dog continue that behavior until released.
> 
> ...


Love it Darren. Really spot on and you put into words what I think many understand in a kind of subconscious way but don't realize. I witness this ALL the time (both positive AND negative patterns) - both with myself/dog and others...


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Renee P. said:


> This is more like the way I learned it, rightly or wrongly, from Dave Rorem.
> 
> In a field trial scenario where you start by letting dog pick out the gunners, the "mark" cue is used to instill extra memory in the dog's head for the key bird before you call for the birds; this could be the long punch bird or the short retired, depending on the setup and your dog's strengths, weaknesses.
> 
> ...


Ditto, (though not from Rorem directly, for me).


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> Pretty simple actually - dogs are good at patterns. If they hear the same set of words and see the same body postures over and over just before being sent to retrieve they know the pattern.
> 
> If you are a good enough trainer to build a behavior into the sequence BEFORE the words are used, they can be very effective at helping the dog continue that behavior until released.
> 
> ...


.
My dog would have to pick up on the the difference between "get your mark" and 'mark'. Perhaps because "mark" is thoroughly ingrained that could take a while. I don't point out the marks currently.Right now he hears it and thinks something is going to fly but it doesn't, then I send him. I've only tried once or twice. I'm sure he would see it as situational after a while, but I'm thinking I don't want that. My dog has a a tendency to run all over everywhere so I think it is no good for him. Too bad they have a rule about returning to old falls and disturbing unnecessary grounds, because I could use persistence to my advantage. He could revisit all the falls and still come up with the bird. That's an exageration.


----------



## Bill McKnight (Sep 11, 2014)

Bill Totten once said he has a descriptive word for every mark. I use easy, way out, and mark. Doesn't matter what the word just so you are consistent. I do believe it helps the dog know which bird you want next. Field trials can get very complicated, use of words to identify which mark you want helps simplify things. Be careful though to not put to much emphases on a particular bird/word. When I first got started I had a habit of really focusing on what I thought to be a key bird. I was so good at it my dog would often go for that bird even if it was not the last bird down. Got me in a lot of trouble, all of my own doing. So, be subtle in your dialog with your dog.

Ronan Bill


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

DL said:


> .
> My dog would have to pick up on the the difference between "get your mark" and 'mark'. Perhaps because "mark" is thoroughly ingrained that could take a while. I don't point out the marks currently.Right now he hears it and thinks something is going to fly but it doesn't, then I send him. I've only tried once or twice. I'm sure he would see it as situational after a while, but I'm thinking I don't want that. My dog has a a tendency to run all over everywhere so I think it is no good for him. Too bad they have a rule about returning to old falls and disturbing unnecessary grounds, because I could use persistence to my advantage. He could revisit all the falls and still come up with the bird. That's an exageration.


You're not showing your dog the guns then? Are you training for HT or FT? I'm confused. I think your dog sounds confused. If your dog is running around everywhere, might want to consider what you're doing for marks, leave off the doubles and simplify until your dog is marking solid then advance the concepts, gradually, following a consistent, proven format.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

I have a girl that tends to bounce btw marks, both on the line and sometimes while going out to make a retrieve. Happens particularly during tests, technical marks, converging close-in line marks etc. Thus to get her to lock in to one I often give verbal ques, where's your mark, no not that one, where's your mark(easy or way out) mark, good good. Then send, if I don't take the time to ensure she has an individual mark and is ignoring the others, she'll often split the difference btw 2; or start to head out on one, all of the sudden choose the other and wipe the line of the first. Not good in a test. She is a younger dog started out testing in upper levels, still a tad nervous about running tests, and overly concerned with remembering every mark, taking the correct way etc. The verbals and time I take on the line relaxes her, and takes a lot of indecision out of if. If I just lined her up and didn't get the lock, she tends to head out hard, but then starts worrying about other options, I swear it's like she's contemplating algebra on the way-out . Different maps digesting in her head, this or that; Me cuing her stops it. So she'll get her verbals ques for as long as she needs them, once her confidence in testing comes around she'll get less direction. Still this is all reliant on her understanding the cues, which we've worked on with secondary selection in training. Most likely also depends on the type of dog your dealing with. Some dogs listen and work well with cues, others you could recite til your blue in the face, they don't respond most likely never even hear you.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> You're not showing your dog the guns then? Are you training for HT or FT? I'm confused. I think your dog sounds confused. If your dog is running around everywhere, might want to consider what you're doing for marks, leave off the doubles and simplify until your dog is marking solid then advance the concepts, gradually, following a consistent, proven format.


He is only running around everywhere on harder memory birds. He used to run around everywhere on singles but not anymore. I am doing delayed triples as one of my stepping stones.Most of what I do are singles. I am running field trial. I don't have a pro telling me how to run my dog and have never been to the point where I need to point out guns. Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing stuff out according to the videos. I don't really care about the ribbons at this point although I plan to get one eventually.. I like to think I have my own goals and make my own rules, it doesn't matter if I fail. I'd rather be doing some other things anyway.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DL said:


> He is only running around everywhere on harder memory birds. He used to run around everywhere on singles but not anymore. I am doing delayed triples as one of my stepping stones.Most of what I do are singles. I am running field trial. I don't have a pro telling me how to run my dog and have never been to the point where I need to point out guns. Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing stuff out according to the videos. I don't really care about the ribbons at this point although I plan to get one eventually.. I like to think I have my own goals and make my own rules, it doesn't matter if I fail. I'd rather be doing some other things anyway.


I'm sure Danny Farmer does point out gun stations prior to calling for the birds. I don't know how much lining he does in general when he sends for the memory bird, but for most of us, it depends on the dog, whether we are trying to secondary select, if the dog lines himself up with a very positive look, or seems a little fuzzy. Then as others have pointed out, we use verbal cues, such as "easy" for a check down bird, "way out" for a long punch bird and "mark" or "where's your mark?" for general memory birds. Like Bill said, it doesn't matter what you say, as long as you are consistent. You could say cup cake and teacup for check downs and punch birds. The advantage of using a standardized nomenclature is that other people can run your dog without learning your secret code.

As to whether you want to run field trials versus "other things", or care about ribbons or goals, that's up to you. This sport is way hard as it is dedicating myself 100% and trying to be a student of the game, I can't imagine it would be much fun to not care, but to each his own.


----------



## jrrichar (Dec 17, 2013)

DL said:


> He is only running around everywhere on harder memory birds. He used to run around everywhere on singles but not anymore. I am doing delayed triples as one of my stepping stones.Most of what I do are singles. I am running field trial. I don't have a pro telling me how to run my dog and have never been to the point where I need to point out guns. Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing stuff out according to the videos. I don't really care about the ribbons at this point although I plan to get one eventually.. I like to think I have my own goals and make my own rules, it doesn't matter if I fail. I'd rather be doing some other things anyway.


You don't pick out guns and you don't know why your dog has gorilla hunts on the memory bird. I think an FT ribbon is unlikely unless you realize you know nothing and find people who do.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

DL - I am beginning to run delayed triples with my boy.
When I go to the line I make sure to 'show' my dog each station. I focus him on the memory station twice - first and last - I might even have the gunner do a hey hey or make noise/movement to really get my dog focused. Then I call for the memory mark to be thrown and let him focus on it before calling for the next mark (double at this point). Send for go bird. Now he gets back from the go bird and I am lined up for the memory mark. I let him key on it again, then call for the third mark which he then retrieves. Because I have showed him the memory mark 4 times (twice before marks are thrown and twice while marks are thrown) he usually doesn't have much trouble remembering it.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

Bill McKnight said:


> Bill Totten once said he has a descriptive word for every mark. I use easy, way out, and mark. Doesn't matter what the word just so you are consistent. I do believe it helps the dog know which bird you want next. Field trials can get very complicated, use of words to identify which mark you want helps simplify things. Be careful though to not put to much emphases on a particular bird/word. When I first got started I had a habit of really focusing on what I thought to be a key bird. I was so good at it my dog would often go for that bird even if it was not the last bird down. Got me in a lot of trouble, all of my own doing. So, be subtle in your dialog with your dog.
> 
> Ronan Bill


Totten probably learned that from George W...but you are spot on with the dialogue with the dog...the one that used to really confuse me is when one person I used to train with used the verbage "No Here"...always thought that was confusing, on one hand he is telling the dog No, but he is also telling the dog Here..


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

captainjack said:


> If it's a memory bird, not retired, and dog appears fuzzy... I'll say mark to help him remember.


I do the same, but because I talk way too much to my dogs, it's 'Where's your mark?'. If we're consistant, they learn to use those cues, even with an overtalkative handler like me. I have cues for check down, punch, mid range and cheating marks. Used when showing and picking up the birds. But my dogs are pretty good markers, even with all that talking, because the sequence is never altered. it's been the same for years.
I do use No - Here, a lot too. But not as one word. It's 'No', I don't want you thinking it's there, It's 'Here'. Being careful not to No them off a place they may have to go later.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Brian Cagle said:


> Since you know more than the top FT Pros that point out guns to their dogs and you're such a superb trainer and handler then why do you come here for advise?


Because he doesn't care about ribbons or goals, and he wants to do it differently. Hate to be snarky, but come-on.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Tobias said:


> DL - I am beginning to run delayed triples with my boy.
> When I go to the line I make sure to 'show' my dog each station. I focus him on the memory station twice - first and last - I might even have the gunner do a hey hey or make noise/movement to really get my dog focused. Then I call for the memory mark to be thrown and let him focus on it before calling for the next mark (double at this point). Send for go bird. Now he gets back from the go bird and I am lined up for the memory mark. I let him key on it again, then call for the third mark which he then retrieves. Because I have showed him the memory mark 4 times (twice before marks are thrown and twice while marks are thrown) he usually doesn't have much trouble remembering it.


Thanks, that is interesting. I can't really imagine doing it that way but that doesn't mean anything. My dog has improved over last fall when I first tried a delayed triples and thought he stunk beyond belief at it.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Brian Cagle said:


> Since you know more than the top FT Pros that point out guns to their dogs and you're such a superb trainer and handler then why do you come here for advise?


Why not? I gave a really good explanation why I have never pointed out gun stations and none of it had anything to do with being an expert. One reason of the three reasons is the video poo poos pointing out gun stations. It is self explanatory.


----------



## jrrichar (Dec 17, 2013)

DL said:


> Why not? I gave a really good explanation why I have never pointed out gun stations and none of it had anything to do with being an expert. One reason of the three reasons is the video poo poos pointing out gun stations. It is self explanatory.


Your explanation was "Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing out in his videos." That's your really good explanation? Based on that sage advice I'd say your on your way to getting ribbons, or not- cause you do care or don't care. 

I think you and BJ need to get your own forum and video series.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

DL said:


> He is only running around everywhere on harder memory birds. He used to run around everywhere on singles but not anymore. I am doing delayed triples as one of my stepping stones.Most of what I do are singles. I am running field trial. I don't have a pro telling me how to run my dog and have never been to the point where I need to point out guns. Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing stuff out according to the videos. I don't really care about the ribbons at this point although I plan to get one eventually.. I like to think I have my own goals and make my own rules, it doesn't matter if I fail. I'd rather be doing some other things anyway.


I haven't seen the videos. 

But, I have trained with Danny and I have judged Danny. 

I would say that - in training - he places a lot of responsibility on the dog to find the guns. 

But, in competition, if there is a bird that is hard to pick out, or is the key to the test, he will work it plenty. 

Danny will also tell you that one of the keys is to persuade a dog without the dog knowing that you are. He is very subtle in his movements and cues

I think you are making a conclusion on too little information.


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

jrrichar said:


> I think you and BJ need to get your own forum and video series.


Now that would be entertaining!!!!!!


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Because he doesn't care about ribbons or goals, and he wants to do it differently. Hate to be snarky, but come-on.


I didn't say I didn't care about goals. I believe I said I tried to make my own goals and make my own decisions. That makes the world my oyster instead of my prison. I don't like prison.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

jrrichar said:


> Your explanation was "Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing out in his videos." That's your really good explanation? Based on that sage advice I'd say your on your way to getting ribbons, or not- cause you do care or don't care.
> 
> I think you and BJ need to get your own forum and video series.


What are my other two reasons? They are my good explanation.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I haven't seen the videos.
> 
> But, I have trained with Danny and I have judged Danny.
> 
> ...


It was more of a side note. It is cool in my opinion that you have first hand knowledge and shared. I didn't exactly proclaim a conclusion. I have no reason to do that, but you communicated your point perfectly.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Because he doesn't care about ribbons or goals, and he wants to do it differently. Hate to be snarky, but come-on.


I didn't say I didn't care about goals. I believe I said I tried to make my own goals and make my own decisions. That makes the world my oyster instead of my prison. I don't like prison.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Daren Galloway said:


> Now that would be entertaining!!!!!!


Most of the time I think you are Darrin Greene. The two of you are one in the same on here also.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

jrrichar said:


> Your explanation was "Danny Farmer doesn't do a lot of pointing out in his videos." That's your really good explanation? Based on that sage advice I'd say your on your way to getting ribbons, or not- cause you do care or don't care.
> 
> I think you and BJ need to get your own forum and video series.


To a certain degree ganging up on BJ was classless. It happens sometimes, but if I were you I wouldn't wear it like a badge of honor.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DL said:


> I didn't say I didn't care about goals. I believe I said I tried to make my own goals and make my own decisions. That makes the world my oyster instead of my prison. I don't like prison.


Didn't mean to pile on. My personal goals have evolved over the years, starting with putting a JH, then SH and finally an MH on my first dog. Then I switched to field trials and at first just wanted a QAA dog, then you get hooked and work toward a titled dog and running Nationals. That said don't be too stubborn about doing everything your own way, there's nothing wrong with doing things the tried and proven way.


----------



## jrrichar (Dec 17, 2013)

DL you know my name how classless of you not to give yours! I never attacked BJ in the last post because the insanity in that thread didn't deserve a reply. He took away from someone's informative posting for no reason. That is classless.

I would consider myself an above average reader and I have no clue where your other points are. It doesn't matter, you think you have all the answers then don't ask for any. 

Its always great to see people who don't post their name, don't actively compete, don't judge, and are not active in volunteering dispensing judgement and feelings. 

Competition has a sobering effect on many like you. Good luck...you'll need it.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

jrrichar said:


> DL you know my name how classless of you not to give yours! I never attacked BJ in the last post because the insanity in that thread didn't deserve a reply. He took away from someone's informative posting for no reason. That is classless.
> 
> I would consider myself an above average reader and I have no clue where your other points are. It doesn't matter, you think you have all the answers then don't ask for any.
> 
> ...


Go to post #31 and read the highlighted part of the quote. I don't currently point out guns because I have never gotten to the point where I needed to and I don't have a pro telling me the need to do so, and as a side note it is poo pooped in video. What point does someone have a need to point out guns? It isn't the SH. Maybe it is the qualifying, maybe not? If you made your own goals you wouldn't be so familiar with being sobered and feel the need to impart that reality on other people. I made a good contribution to this board with this post. There wasn't any need for anyone to get their feathers ruffled. Perhaps, I am past being sobered and posting facts and fragile egos can't take it?


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

DL said:


> Go to post #31 and read the highlighted part of the quote. I don't currently point out guns because I have never gotten to the point where I needed to and I don't have a pro telling me the need to do so, and as a side note it is poo pooped in video. What point does someone have a need to point out guns? It isn't the SH. Maybe it is the qualifying, maybe not? If you made your own goals you wouldn't be so familiar with being sobered and feel the need to impart that reality on other people. I made a good contribution to this board with this post. There wasn't any need for anyone to get their feathers ruffled. Perhaps, I am past being sobered and posting facts and fragile egos can't take it?


I don't think there's as many fragile egos as there is arrogance. There's no way for you, new to this forum, to know the people that actually train their own dogs. Those are the people that are the most valuable to someone like yourself. Not someone who writes checks all the time, and is an encyclopedia of dog training info, only because they're repeating what their pro's have yelled at them for decades. Not because they've actually put a dog through the yard and into advanced training. There's a huge difference.
You'll figure it out, eventually.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

You can't point out marks in a HT competition. Almost everyone does it in field trials if they are serious competitors, Pros and Amateurs. You have been told so by a veteran judge that Farmer does also point out guns in competition. Your dog is running around and you think you don't need to point out guns so basically you are being told you have a BIG problems, like moving too fast for one. You are not going to reinvent training and impress this crowd. At this point you come on here to ask for help and then say you are doing it your way. *You are coming off like a troll* and you pretty much sound like you don't even know about progression training programs or what is required in competition stakes. It is so obvious almost anyone who has trained and run in HT and FT knows you aren't "posting facts".


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

What? DL did you just say you are an ex-con?


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

ErinsEdge said:


> You can't point out marks in a HT competition. Almost everyone does it in field trials if they are serious competitors, Pros and Amateurs.


Haven't watched the videos but I figure most like, they don't recommend pointing out stations during training , because it's better to teach the dog to look for them themselves and learn how to pick them out. However in testing you do all that you can to get the dog to see the mark, them being able to pick out a station is paramount to that. Now HT it's illegal to point out the stations until the birds are in the air, realistically the stations should be hidden, where you can't easily pick them out, (now if they aren't hidden and the dogs pick them out that's not your or the dogs fault, so most teach the dog how to look for them in training ). FT is a whole different ball-game, the gunners are in white to be seen and handlers take their time and point out the stations, get the dog a feel for depth, where the bird should go etc. before calling for the birds. Now if you've ran the FTs and haven't bothered to point out the stations, your putting yourself at a disadvantage because the other handlers are pointing them out. It's not that they have to that much; most dogs already know to pick stations out, but you can bet the handler is doing what they can to help. Now seems that this dog is having issue with solidify where the bird is, and where the bird should be in regard to the station. He's running all over because he's not connecting the station to bird location, also not connecting needing to stay in a general area to hunt. As such might be beneficial to train on it, allowing the dog time to pick out the stations, letting the dog go directly to the AOF, in relation to the station and only allow him to hunt there. Also might benefit giving the dog a que on when to look for stations. Now you choose the que, but seems as if using mark is confusing, to the handler or the team, so use something else but you want it to be pretty close in both situations whether your asking you dog to "mark" (aka pick out the station and see the picture), or Get your mark (aka. remember the fall, and it's relation to the station). Might find some training buddies who run whatever venue you want and are successful, a lot of typing on the internet, a lot of talking in videos, a lot of why this and not that, can be illustrated much better simply by training with experienced people.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> I don't think there's as many fragile egos as there is arrogance. There's no way for you, new to this forum, to know the people that actually train their own dogs. Those are the people that are the most valuable to someone like yourself. Not someone who writes checks all the time, and is an encyclopedia of dog training info, only because they're repeating what their pro's have yelled at them for decades. Not because they've actually put a dog through the yard and into advanced training. There's a huge difference.
> You'll figure it out, eventually.


I've been on the forum 15 years. I never said I knew who is who. Frankly, I am not capable of keeping track of it. That probably sounds arrogant to you when it is simply facts. I take no offense to your comment.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Pointing out guns in training does not mean walking to the line, sit dog, and immediately start pushing and pulling the dog to show the guns. 

First, whether hunt test set up or trial set up, we sit the dog and let them survey the field and hopefully find all of the guns or gun stations/holding blinds. In a field trial set up, we will push/pull dog to any station not picked out and may emphasize a station, like a short retired, maybe even cuing "easy". Some people will move their dog a couple times from the first to second gun before signaling. Say long middle gun is 1, right gun is 2, left gun is 3. So after dog has seen guns, put dog on 1, push or pull to 2. Repeat the movement 1 to 2. Then put on 1 and call for bird. They idea being to encourage the dog to move to 2 rather than 3 (usually a flyer) after 1st bird is down. 

So people should not interpret showing the guns as not allowing the dog to survey and find them on their own. Also, there is zero to be gained in training by throwing a mark that the dog does not see. So you show or point out the gun when the dog cannot find on its own.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> You can't point out marks in a HT competition. Almost everyone does it in field trials if they are serious competitors, Pros and Amateurs. You have been told so by a veteran judge that Farmer does also point out guns in competition. Your dog is running around and you think you don't need to point out guns so basically you are being told you have a BIG problems, like moving too fast for one. You are not going to reinvent training and impress this crowd. At this point you come on here to ask for help and then say you are doing it your way. *You are coming off like a troll* and you pretty much sound like you don't even know about progression training programs or what is required in competition stakes. It is so obvious almost anyone who has trained and run in HT and FT knows you aren't "posting facts".


I am posting my facts. You have actually bolstered my point as there is a reason I have never pointed out gun stations.I'm not against pointing them out. If I say I am running field trial there are multiple possibilities with that. One of them is that is that I'm not specifically training for hunt tests or whatever. It doesn't necessarily mean I am stepping to the line every weekend in the open. It means I don't have a big interest in hunt tests for whatever reason. It isn't too hard to figure out my position if you open your mind to the possibilities.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

captainjack said:


> Pointing out guns in training does not mean walking to the line, sit dog, and immediately start pushing and pulling the dog to show the guns.
> 
> First, whether hunt test set up or trial set up, we sit the dog and let them survey the field and hopefully find all of the guns or gun stations/holding blinds. In a field trial set up, we will push/pull dog to any station not picked out and may emphasize a station, like a short retired, maybe even cuing "easy". Some people will move their dog a couple times from the first to second gun before signaling. Say long middle gun is 1, right gun is 2, left gun is 3. So after dog has seen guns, put dog on 1, push or pull to 2. Repeat the movement 1 to 2. Then put on 1 and call for bird. They idea being to encourage the dog to move to 2 rather than 3 (usually a flyer) after 1st bird is down.
> 
> So people should not interpret showing the guns as not allowing the dog to survey and find them on their own. Also, there is zero to be gained in training by throwing a mark that the dog does not see. So you show or point out the gun when the dog cannot find on its own.


The qualifying I ran I specifically walked to the line so that he was looking at the key bird. If he didn't see one of the birds before calling for them I would have pointed it out. I'm not saying I've got that figured out or anything else for that matter. Thanks for commenting.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Haven't watched the videos but I figure most like, they don't recommend pointing out stations during training , because it's better to teach the dog to look for them themselves and learn how to pick them out. However in testing you do all that you can to get the dog to see the mark, them being able to pick out a station is paramount to that. Now HT it's illegal to point out the stations until the birds are in the air, realistically the stations should be hidden, where you can't easily pick them out, (now if they aren't hidden and the dogs pick them out that's not your or the dogs fault, so most teach the dog how to look for them in training ). FT is a whole different ball-game, the gunners are in white to be seen and handlers take their time and point out the stations, get the dog a feel for depth, where the bird should go etc. before calling for the birds. Now if you've ran the FTs and haven't bothered to point out the stations, your putting yourself at a disadvantage because the other handlers are pointing them out. It's not that they have to that much; most dogs already know to pick stations out, but you can bet the handler is doing what they can to help. Now seems that this dog is having issue with solidify where the bird is, and where the bird should be in regard to the station. He's running all over because he's not connecting the station to bird location, also not connecting needing to stay in a general area to hunt. As such might be beneficial to train on it, allowing the dog time to pick out the stations, letting the dog go directly to the AOF, in relation to the station and only allow him to hunt there. Also might benefit giving the dog a que on when to look for stations. Now you choose the que, but seems as if using mark is confusing, to the handler or the team, so use something else but you want it to be pretty close in both situations whether your asking you dog to "mark" (aka pick out the station and see the picture), or Get your mark (aka. remember the fall, and it's relation to the station). Might find some training buddies who run whatever venue you want and are successful, a lot of typing on the internet, a lot of talking in videos, a lot of why this and not that, can be illustrated much better simply by training with experienced people.


Thanks, I am actually liking the idea of giving them different names.I am going to reread your post if I get a chance.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Brian Cagle said:


> You said you run FT's but then you say "I don't currently point out guns because I have never gotten to the point where I needed to" which means you're not running FT's. So, which is it?
> 
> "I made a good contribution to this board with this post" NOT. It's apparent to anyone here with just a little experience that you have no clue what you're talking about. Please do not offer any advise to the newbies either. It's people like you who lead them down the wrong path. You pretend you know everything but just the other week you were asking about nicking a young dog for trying to get in the water early. You've been here for 13 years and have over a thousand post and you still don't know the answers to the basics. You might want to quit posting and start reading.
> 
> ...


You actually came out of blue IMO on this thread and this sounds you have a history with my posts. Did you change your name? My riddle about making life your oyster and not your prison is a good quote. It's brilliant, no?

P.S. I forgot to answer you question. I ran one qualifying. He saw the birds on his own. I may never be ready to run another. The other lady wants me to judge from what I gather, ha, ha. Sorry, that sounds like a troll. I think it is brilliant.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DL said:


> I am posting my facts. You have actually bolstered my point as there is a reason I have never pointed out gun stations.I'm not against pointing them out. If I say I am running field trial there are multiple possibilities with that. One of them is that is that I'm not specifically training for hunt tests or whatever. It doesn't necessarily mean I am stepping to the line every weekend in the open. It means I don't have a big interest in hunt tests for whatever reason. It isn't too hard to figure out my position if you open your mind to the possibilities.


I'm may be a little slow, but I'm not getting your point. Are you asking for reasons why people usually point out the guns in field trials and field trial training, or are you advocating that in your opinion, it isn't necessary to do so? 

As to your reasons for running or not running hunt test or field trials, that's totally your perogative.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> I'm may be a little slow, but I'm not getting your point. Are you asking for reasons why people usually point out the guns in field trials and field trial training, or are you advocating that in your opinion, it isn't necessary to do so?
> 
> As to your reasons for running or not running hunt test or field trials, that's totally your perogative.


None of the above. I'm in no position to advocate or judge anything. Like I have been saying I've never been in a postion to do it. I couldn't possible have a position on it. My question was about the "where's the mark" cue.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

DL said:


> None of the above. I'm in no position to advocate or judge anything. Like I have been saying I've never been in a postion to do it. I couldn't possible have a position on it.


Now would be a good time to bow out ?
You asked your question , You got reply's .
Read and reflect them reply's . Take the ones that are sincere and discard the ones that appear not.


----------



## John Condon (Mar 27, 2013)

DL said:


> None of the above. I'm in no position to advocate or judge anything. Like I have been saying I've never been in a postion to do it. I couldn't possible have a position on it. My question was about the "where's the mark" cue.


There has to be a clue here somewhere????


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DL said:


> None of the above. I'm in no position to advocate or judge anything. Like I have been saying I've never been in a postion to do it. I couldn't possible have a position on it. My question was about the "where's the mark" cue.


Well that certainly got derailed. Did you get the answer you were looking for? I thought CaptJack explained it pretty well.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

John Robinson said:


> Well that certainly got derailed. Did you get the answer you were looking for? I thought CaptJack explained it pretty well.


It got Derailed !


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

DL said:


> None of the above. I'm in no position to advocate or judge anything. Like I have been saying I've never been in a postion to do it. I couldn't possible have a position on it. My question was about the "where's the mark" cue.


The cue, as I use it (learned from Lardy workshop), isn't a question. You get the dog locked on the gun either on his own, or by using the heel and/or here command. Once the dog is focused, you say "mark". It indicates that something is about to happen. 

Watch the first 10 minutes of this...

http://www.gpb.org/television/shows/georgia-outdoors

Actually gives the cue at the 1:40 mark


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

captainjack said:


> The cue, as I use it (learned from Lardy workshop), isn't a question. You get the dog locked on the gun either on his own, or by using the heel and/or here command. Once the dog is focused, you say "mark". It indicates that something is about to happen.
> 
> Watch the first 10 minutes of this...
> 
> ...


It should never ever be a pissing who or what has ! ..But sometimes the dog is just as focused learned from any -one ?..and 'locked on' ..without saying anything as a cue ? ..Not some-ones way ? but hey' if it works .
Watch less than 10 minutes ,and stop beating up . 
and this little puppy gets You all the way to the 'mark' . But that's just me . 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0_VT86kxZg


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

polmaise said:


> It should never ever be a pissing who or what has ! ..But sometimes the dog is just as focused learned from any -one ?..and 'locked on' ..without saying anything as a cue ? ..Not some-ones way ? but hey' if it works .
> Watch less than 10 minutes ,and stop beating up .
> and this little puppy gets You all the way to the 'mark' . But that's just me .
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0_VT86kxZg


Don't understand a word of that gibberish. Maybe BJ can decipher?

I'll stick with Lardy's approach. Works fairly well on this side of the pond. Thanks anyway though!


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

The problem with this thread, as is the case with so many internet threads, is that people get to a concrete or specific level way too soon. 

What cues you use is so very dependent upon:
- Context (hunting, hunt test, field trial)
- Experience of dog
- Experience of handler

Speaking as to Field Trials, I will do much more with a baby than I would with an old warhorse. 

A six year old Field Champion, knows what is coming up as it goes through the holding blinds. Lots of whistles, lots of verbal casts - we are running blinds. Lots of shots, few whistles - we are running marks. An experienced handler will have a different demeanor for marks (more loose) than blinds (more tight). The experienced dog knows what is coming before it leaves the blind because of environmental cues (whistles v. shots), handler non-verbal language. My best competition dogs come out of the blind looking for guns. As I walk to the mat, I can see them check off the stations one by one, until they fix on the flyer. Unless there is a really tough bird - or two - that I really need to work on, I will simply come to the mat, let the dog settle in, align its spine to the go bird, direct its head to the first bird shot, say "sit" (my cue that the birds will shot soon) then call for the birds. I think that this approach places responsibility on the dogs to find the guns and settle in. I think that when you come to the line, settle into the mat, and then call for the birds, it teaches the dog to be ready to go. 

In baseball, the fielders prefer a pitcher that gets to work quickly. That way they can keep their intensity at a fever pitch. I think the same is true for the dogs. I watch handlers go through the whole vocabulary, move the dog back and forth, and I think it teaches the dogs to not pay attention. When you don't say much, and then say something, it registers. When you talk all the time, I think the message is lost. A good friend of mine says - in the context of children - "Communicate constantly. Speak when necessary." But, I think it is applicable to the dogs. 

If there is a hard short bird, after the dog is on the mat and sitting (I don't like movement on the mat by my dogs), I might get the dog to look at that short bird and then say "easy." If there is a big punch bird that I want to focus on, I would get the dog's attention on the bird and say "mark." Depending on the situation and the difficulty of the bird, I might spend a lot of time. Again, I think you have to prioritize. I might work two birds. I would be hard pressed to work three. The person who tries to do everything, does nothing.

After the dog gets the go bird, if the next bird is a short bird, my cues would be:
- Soft voice to get the dog by my side
- Soft body language (relaxed, loose stance)
- Maybe "easy" maybe not
- No hand
- Soft send

If the next bird were a long discipline bird, my cues would be
- Hard voice to get the dog by my side
- Erect, hard posture
- Hard "sit" when the dog was aligned on the mat
- "Mark" (hard voice)
- Maybe another "sit"
- Take bird
- "Mark"
- Hand down
- Hard (not necessarily loud, but definitely hard) send

A younger dog needs more help, but loses focus easier. You cannot work a young dog as long as an older dog on marks. So, you are constantly assessing "how much can I do, before I lose this dog." This is a consideration in an older dog, but much less so. 

So, I would say:
- One size does not fit all
- What you do is very dependent on context
- If you are to communicate effectively with your dog through verbal and non-verbal cues, you need to be consistent.

Ted


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

captainjack said:


> Don't understand a word of that gibberish. Maybe BJ can decipher?
> 
> I'll stick with Lardy's approach. Works fairly well on this side of the pond. Thanks anyway though!



Ok Glen…

To achieve in a program, we must first understand the animal…not us in our terms, but in their terms, without thought on our part or theirs.

*To do so…we become a team in me being the higher order and dog understands their order.* *We do that…then dog becomes our order in our goals not theirs.*Rant on...and my almost my last post....


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Excellent post Ted.
RTF can be resuscitate if people quit choking it.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Ted Shih said:


> The problem with this thread, as is the case with so many internet threads, is that people get to a concrete or specific level way too soon.
> 
> What cues you use is so very dependent upon:
> - Context (hunting, hunt test, field trial)
> ...


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

My decoder ring does not work on foreign languages. Hahalol.

Good post Ted.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

DL said:


> .
> My dog would have to pick up on the the difference between "get your mark" and 'mark'.


That's not true - the dog will pick out the words it knows (those that have been reinforced). 

I can say to my Chessy - Hey ANGUS COME over here BUDDY and SIT right there on your PLACE. 

He know's ANGUS (look at me) COME (get close) BUDDY (praise) SIT (butt on the ground) and PLACE (get on a place board or other spot I'm devastating). 

The last two commands in that case are actually out of order but he understands exactly what I'm saying because I've said it to him in demonstrations like 1,000 times. He only knows the capitalized words. The rest is just background noise.

If you taught the dog what "mark" meant you could say "oly oly oxenfree mark" and get the same result as "get your mark".

Don't think too hard about this They know sounds that have consistent outcomes. That's all.


----------



## RetrieversONLINE (Nov 24, 2005)

Ted:

Your Field Trial procedure post is very close to what I try to do. One caution that I don't think has been mentioned here. 

For most dogs, they learn to focus on and look at the visible gunner when we say "mark" or "watch". Therefore when you are trying to get a long retired gun bird and there is a visible gun in the field nearby, it is dangerous to say "mark". This often gets the dog to look at the visible-just what you don't want! On tight birds, the dog may be looking back and forth and your timing can be off. I use "sit" often to get a dog to focus and lock. In the situation I describe, it is a safer "cue" when I am quite sure he is looking at the longer retired.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> That's not true - the dog will pick out the words it knows (those that have been reinforced).
> 
> I can say to my Chessy - Hey ANGUS COME over here BUDDY and SIT right there on your PLACE.
> 
> ...


My point exactly. You just added the words, " not true", and I am fine with that.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

EXCELLENT post Ted! Thanks for taking the time


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

RetrieversONLINE said:


> Ted:
> 
> Your Field Trial procedure post is very close to what I try to do. One caution that I don't think has been mentioned here.
> 
> For most dogs, they learn to focus on and look at the visible gunner when we say "mark" or "watch". Therefore when you are trying to get a long retired gun bird and there is a visible gun in the field nearby, it is dangerous to say "mark". This often gets the dog to look at the visible-just what you don't want! On tight birds, the dog may be looking back and forth and your timing can be off. I use "sit" often to get a dog to focus and lock. In the situation I describe, it is a safer "cue" when I am quite sure he is looking at the longer retired.


Very similar to what I've been taught, as well, both Ted's and Dennis's posts. We let the dog get to the mat and settle, find the guns, then choose if there is a bird or two to really focus on, if we use a cue on, etc, not alot of body (dog) movement back and forth, reheeling dog, etc. Same when we are trying to focus dog back on a mark after others have been retrieved, using same cues, tone of voice, etc as needed. it isn't black and white same for every dog every time. But the cues themselves need to be consistent. OP sounds like he's willy nilly all over the place, and then tries to throw in a cue, that is confusing the dog, because it has been taught no connection. The way he wrote, sounded like he is using sound to get the dog's attention on a mark vs letting the dogs see and find the guns and have the dog ready and watching for the first mark to go off, moving dog to next one, etc.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> Very similar to what I've been taught, as well, both Ted's and Dennis's posts. We let the dog get to the mat and settle, find the guns, then choose if there is a bird or two to really focus on, if we use a cue on, etc, not alot of body (dog) movement back and forth, reheeling dog, etc. Same when we are trying to focus dog back on a mark after others have been retrieved, using same cues, tone of voice, etc as needed. it isn't black and white same for every dog every time. But the cues themselves need to be consistent. OP sounds like he's willy nilly all over the place, and then tries to throw in a cue, that is confusing the dog, because it has been taught no connection. The way he wrote, sounded like he is using sound to get the dog's attention on a mark vs letting the dogs see and find the guns and have the dog ready and watching for the first mark to go off, moving dog to next one, etc.


You are back peddling for some reason. They know what I wrote and meant.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

DL said:


> You are back peddling for some reason. They know what I wrote and meant.


How did I backpedal?


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

DL said:


> My point exactly. You just added the words, " not true", and I am fine with that.


I apologize, I read your post too quickly and didn't focus enough before responding.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> The problem with this thread, as is the case with so many internet threads, is that people get to a concrete or specific level way too soon.
> 
> What cues you use is so very dependent upon:
> - Context (hunting, hunt test, field trial)
> ...



Wonderful post and great advice and explanation.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> How did I backpedal?


You rewrote the past due to some sort of cognitive dissonance. It happens all the time. For instance, you wouldn't be able to quote anything to support your statements other than your recent feelings. My question was about the "where's your mark' cue that. I don't even use. I don't even point out guns like I've said half a dozen times already. If I don't even do those things how could I have said much or anything about my actually doing any of that? The answer is it didn't happen.
'


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

DL - you specifically stated you'e begun to use cues to get the dog to focus on the memory mark. 


DL said:


> *I have just started trying this when it looks like my dog isn't focused on getting a memory bird. He hears the word mark and I guess he thinks the mark is going to be thrown again.* I'm sure it helps him know we are not running a blind and I send him like it is a memory bird which it is. Do most people start this cue when they first start doubles and do it for every memory bird or just the ones a dog doesn't remember? Some people use the word watch, so that would put them in a different situation? How does this cue work?


So do you or have you used it? Or have you not?

 "*My question was about the "where's your mark' cue that. I don't even use.* I don't even point out guns like I've said half a dozen times already. If I don't even do those things how could I have said much or anything about my actually doing any of that? The answer is it didn't happen."
'


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

DL said:


> You rewrote the past due to some sort of cognitive dissonance. It happens all the time. For instance, you wouldn't be able to quote anything to support your statements other than your recent feelings. My question was about the "where's your mark' cue that. I don't even use. I don't even point out guns like I've said half a dozen times already. If I don't even do those things how could I have said much or anything about my actually doing any of that? The answer is it didn't happen.
> '


Um, OK. You betcha. You have fun, guess that's all that matters, in the end. Me, I have fun seeing my training (and my pro's) accomplish something, like, I dunno, some ribbons now and then, and I do take lessons to heart from those that have succeeded in the venue I want to run. I don't argue with success, while others seem to make it their life's mission, to do it their way, regardless of outcome.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

https://youtu.be/p9JaBMkmAck
From this morning. I said "mark" as I got to the line. Rowdy picked out Mario right away. Then I used my feet, etc to get him to look past Mario to the long gun. Done as singles to work on head swinging.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Wayne Nutt said:


> My decoder ring does not work on foreign languages. Hahalol.
> 
> Good post Ted.


 Well…unfortunately the decoder ring will not be available any more.
There might be some cereal boxes that might have one in it…maybe.

It is up to you to find those folks who have a decoder ring and stay tune for the puzzle.

I want to thank those of you that PM me.
Now if we could just stay on the subject at hand, then all benefit.
Lastly…get those decoder rings ready. 


BJ


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Tobias said:


> DL - you specifically stated you'e begun to use cues to get the dog to focus on the memory mark.
> 
> So do you or have you used it? Or have you not?
> 
> ...


Go to post #21. It says I've only tried it once or twice. I tried it and didn't like it, then I asked a question about it on here. It's ok. I give you a lot of credit for putting in a lot of effort with your posts. They are good. Once isn't a pattern or inconsistency. I wouldn't have an inconsistency with cues. That seems easy. Consistency with something like steadiness or literal casting is a more obvious struggle. Maybe people have a hard time with cues. I don't think I do. I got plenty struggle elsewhere, cues not so much. I don't get that, but like I 've said I haven't got to that point yet. I am a bit of an arse sometimes on the internet. I don't think I have been that bad on this. It makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Gotcha.

Well, I would suspect many, if not most dogs, would do exactly as yours did when first introduced to a cue that uses the same word, but has different meanings. Heel is another that comes to mind. Here, too.

Perhaps if you continued to use the cue but changed the timing of it and take time to teach it in a non field situation. Instead of just saying 'where's your mark' when he comes back and is sitting at your side, maybe try introducing it after the memory mark is down (he is locked in).... or teach it when you are hand throwing doubles or multiples - throw the first with the command 'mark', when it has landed repeat 'where's your mark?' (i'd be inclined to use a different command, actually). Then throw the 'go bird... when he comes back and you have him appropriately lined up give the cue as he focuses, where's your mark...good...send.

Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Tobias said:


> Gotcha.
> 
> Well, I would suspect many, if not most dogs, would do exactly as yours did when first introduced to a cue that uses the same word, but has different meanings. Heel is another that comes to mind. Here, too.
> 
> ...


Thanks, something like you described is probably how people teach that. I have been saying 'way out" for long hard to see marks. I think it could be consistent with the way people do field trial if I said "way out' to get him to remember a long one. I could start using the word "easy" for the shorter bird which I assume is sometimes the medium length bird and never the go bird. That would easy to implement. How far I get with that is highly questionable at this point, but it is down a road I have curiousity about.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

DL said:


> I am a bit of an arse sometimes on the internet.



This is hardly a badge of honor. If you are interested in having a discussion with others, rather than just getting into pissing matches, which you seem to do with some frequency, you might try toning it down.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

BJGatley said:


> Well…unfortunately the decoder ring will not be available any more.
> There might be some cereal boxes that might have one in it…maybe.
> 
> It is up to you to find those folks who have a decoder ring and stay tune for the puzzle.
> ...


Glad to see you decided not to leave BJ


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

DL said:


> Thanks, something like you described is probably how people teach that. I have been saying 'way out" for long hard to see marks. I think it could be consistent with the way people do field trial if I said "way out' to get him to remember a long one. I could start using the word "easy" for the shorter bird which I assume is sometimes the medium length bird and never the go bird. That would easy to implement. How far I get with that is highly questionable at this point, but it is down a road I have curiousity about.


Are you saying "way out" before the mark is thrown, while the dog is keyed on that particular gun?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Cues are not "taught" in the sense that sit or here are taught.

The "mark" cue, for example you simply say "mark" before the first bird is thrown every single time. The dog makes the connection between the word and that gun he's looking at throwing a bird. The dog also should not expect anything to happen until he hears the word. Same when using "mark", band down and firm send for a tough longish standout memory bird. The dog begins to associate the word with a rather disciplined drive to the aof. Similarly the "easy" cue, soft relaxed voice and attitude on send with no hand behind to mean something because every time you use it, it's a short bird. 

These are things you start doing and don't require "training" as such. You will likely notice the dog may be a bit confused at first, such as not going on a soft send if he's not used to it. Just work through it. You can practice the soft send with simple hand thrown bumpers from your side.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

captainjack said:


> Cues are not "taught" in the sense that sit or here are taught.
> 
> The "mark" cue, for example you simply say "mark" before the first bird is thrown every single time. The dog makes the connection between the word and that gun he's looking at throwing a bird. The dog also should not expect anything to happen until he hears the word. Same when using "mark", band down and firm send for a tough longish standout memory bird. The dog begins to associate the word with a rather disciplined drive to the aof. Similarly the "easy" cue, soft relaxed voice and attitude on send with no hand behind to mean something because every time you use it, it's a short bird.
> 
> These are things you start doing and don't require "training" as such. You will likely notice the dog may be a bit confused at first, such as not going on a soft send if he's not used to it. Just work through it. You can practice the soft send with simple hand thrown bumpers from your side.


I taught my dog the cue 'way out' through hand thrown marks. I suppose you could let a dog 'sponge' the context of the cue over time, I chose to be more methodical.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Tobias said:


> I taught my dog the cue 'way out' through hand thrown marks. I suppose you could let a dog 'sponge' the context of the cue over time, I chose to be more methodical.


Do you mean ,like a 'verbal marker' ? ..as in like this could be done with a shot as well ?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Tobias said:


> I taught my dog the cue 'way out' through hand thrown marks. I suppose you could let a dog 'sponge' the context of the cue over time, I chose to be more methodical.


How could you teach way out with hand thrown marks? How far can you throw?

Cues are not commands. They indicate something will happen rather than call for the dog to take action.

Did you also teach the dog to salivate when you reach for the dog treats?


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Way out refers to a mark that is longer than other marks. If I throw 4 hand thrown bumpers and cue way out on the long one, I can then line him up to the long one and have him run right over the top of a shorter one. I the transitioned this to longer field marks. 

Don't know if that is direc teaching or indirect teaching... still, the dog learned something.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Tobias said:


> Way out refers to a mark that is longer than other marks. If I throw 4 hand thrown bumpers and cue way out on the long one, I can then line him up to the long one and have him run right over the top of a shorter one. I the transitioned this to longer field marks.
> 
> Don't know if that is direc teaching or indirect teaching... still, the dog learned something.


I don't know if direct-indirect is the term, but I in my mind there's a distinction between teaching your dog to sit, heel or fetch vs letting them learn by association. I've "taught" my dogs to shake by reading when they are going to shake on their own and timing my "command" shake just before. There is no correction when I say shake and they don't shake, it's just after maybe a hundred times saying shake when they were going to shake anyway, they start responding almost involuntarily, like Pavlov's dinner bell.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

Tobias said:


> Way out refers to a mark that is longer than other marks. If I throw 4 hand thrown bumpers and cue way out on the long one, I can then line him up to the long one and have him run right over the top of a shorter one. I the transitioned this to longer field marks.
> 
> Don't know if that is direc teaching or indirect teaching... still, the dog learned something.


Why would you teach a dog to run over another mark?


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

John Robinson said:


> I don't know if direct-indirect is the term, *but I in my mind there's a distinction between teaching your dog to sit, heel or fetch vs letting them learn by association.* I've "taught" my dogs to shake by reading when they are going to shake on their own and timing my "command" shake just before. *There is no correction when I say shake and they don't shake, it's just after maybe a hundred times saying shake when they were going to shake anyway, they start responding almost involuntarily*, like Pavlov's dinner bell.


Nice one John , Most folk say 'Sit' when the dog is actually standing . Never did figure that one out .  (some say 'sit,sit,sit.here' ) while the dog remains standing . The dog usually sits in the end with a picture cue though, so that's fine .


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

cakaiser said:


> Why would you teach a dog to run over another mark?


Because I wanted to see if he could learn to do it.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Tobias said:


> Because I wanted to see if he could learn to do it.


......Oh MY...


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

mjh345 said:


> ......Oh MY...



Madness abounds.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> Are you saying "way out" before the mark is thrown, while the dog is keyed on that particular gun?


What I believe I have done to teach it is say the cue while trying to focus on that particular mark, and have that particular mark thrown once the focus is there. It is like the word mark but it specifies the long bird. I don't think the way I have done it is uncommon.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

I may have been incorrect about the source of my idea that someone shouldn't waste a lot of time pointing out guns. It may not have been my Farmer/Aycock videos. I believe it may have been something said at a seminar. Maybe it is from both. I don't say that necessarily to argue, but because I don't take misquoting anyone lightly no matter how mundane it is.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

DL said:


> What I believe I have done to teach it is say the cue while trying to focus on that particular mark, and have that particular mark thrown once the focus is there. It is like the word mark but it specifies the long bird. I don't think the way I have done it is uncommon.


No, not uncommon, that's pretty much it in a nutshell. I use "long" and "easy" and tone of voice, hand down or no hand down, but it doesn't matter what cue you use as long as you are consistent. I'm curious though why you would not use that same cue when you are setting the dog up to retrieve that mark? Vs using something else like get your mark or whatever, which was your original question for this thread? Mostly, I think we use the same cue when setting up to retrieve the mark, as we did when pointing out the mark before it was thrown. 

BTW, if you are are using a cue on a mark before it is thrown, I think it stands to reason, you are pointing out/showing your dog the gun(s), despite your indications otherwise.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

A dog bounding over top of and ignoring a poison bird is one thing but never should run over/ignore a mark.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> No, not uncommon, that's pretty much it in a nutshell. I use "long" and "easy" and tone of voice, hand down or no hand down, but it doesn't matter what cue you use as long as you are consistent. I'm curious though why you would not use that same cue when you are setting the dog up to retrieve that mark? Vs using something else like get your mark or whatever, which was your original question for this thread? Mostly, I think we use the same cue when setting up to retrieve the mark, as we did when pointing out the mark before it was thrown.
> 
> BTW, if you are are using a cue on a mark before it is thrown, I think it stands to reason, you are pointing out/showing your dog the gun(s), despite your indications otherwise.


All of the above sounds true to me. Part of it is my thinking from watching others is that pointing out marks is mindlessly pushing and pulling to all the marks whether there is a need or not. I may not be understanding what other people are doing, but gaining an understanding of it. With some people I have seen I don't think they say anything. Maybe they do. If it is hunt test marks and it is a young dog, it seems counterproductive which was echoed in this thread.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Look - for all you that disdain the way I taught my dog to know what 'way out' means - I understand. Not conventional. I am not planning on trying to get him to run over the top of a mark in a field situation
Also - while many of you are training for and running field trials.. That is not my main objective with my dog.. Actually more than running hunt tests, I just like training him, I get far more satisfaction from training than running tests/earning ribbons. I live in a state in which darkness rules the winter, training grounds are sorely lacking, and don't have access to water for 7 months every year. So, what I do is come up with ways to have fun with training, challenge the dog to learn new things. When all there is to do is hand thrown marks around the yard (at the house) well, primary selection does keep things challenging.... (oh, and with a 20 mph tail wind, I can throw a bumper near 50 yd).


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

Tobias said:


> Look - for all you that disdain the way I taught my dog to know what 'way out' means - I understand. Not conventional. I am not planning on trying to get him to run over the top of a mark in a field situation
> Also - while many of you are training for and running field trials.. That is not my main objective with my dog.. Actually more than running hunt tests, I just like training him, I get far more satisfaction from training than running tests/earning ribbons. I live in a state in which darkness rules the winter, training grounds are sorely lacking, and don't have access to water for 7 months every year. So, what I do is come up with ways to have fun with training, challenge the dog to learn new things. When all there is to do is hand thrown marks around the yard (at the house) well, primary selection does keep things challenging.... (oh, and with a 20 mph tail wind, I can throw a bumper near 50 yd).


I doubt there's any harm in what you did, even if you were to train for Field Trials. What you described sounded more like what we do in a wagon wheel drill to me. We throw the bumpers back out as we pick them up in a ww right? Looks like we're throwing short marks. 
Now if you drilled on it constantly, used birds and gave your dog the idea that sometimes you want him to blink a mark, that's different. 
I doubt Howard would recommend it, but just doesn't seem like a big deal to me.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

DL said:


> All of the above sounds true to me. Part of it is my thinking from watching others is that pointing out marks is mindlessly pushing and pulling to all the marks whether there is a need or not. I may not be understanding what other people are doing, but gaining an understanding of it. With some people I have seen I don't think they say anything. Maybe they do. If it is hunt test marks and it is a young dog, it seems counterproductive which was echoed in this thread.


You can't, per rule, show dogs the guns in HT, they are mostly hidden anyway. You can let your dog come to the line (unless it's a walkup) and settle, give whatever commands you use, like sit and/or mark, signal the judges you are ready. There is no pushing/pulling/moving dog around to show guns, in AKC HT. FT, very different in that regard. I think Ted and Captainjack and others have addressed that well and thoroughly. Just a thought, when you are debating with people, it helps to have a common understanding of the terminology and rules of the games being discussed. It is hard to answer a question when 100 posts into a thread, it becomes evident that you have been showing your dog the guns, after multiple adamant protests to the contrary, simply because what you consider pointing out guns, is not what you think you are doing. You have even been using a cue when doing so, on long marks. Had you mentioned what you've been doing, in your original post, much of the back and forth in this thread could have been avoided. Much clearer communication helps, from the get go, with people as well as dogs. Had you said, in your original post, that you are using "way out" when showing your dog a long, difficult mark, and asked about a cue when later sending the dog for that mark, the responses maybe would have been simpler and more useful.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> You can't, per rule, show dogs the guns in HT, they are mostly hidden anyway. You can let your dog come to the line (unless it's a walkup) and settle, give whatever commands you use, like sit and/or mark, signal the judges you are ready. There is no pushing/pulling/moving dog around to show guns, in AKC HT. FT, very different in that regard. I think Ted and Captainjack and others have addressed that well and thoroughly. Just a thought, when you are debating with people, it helps to have a common understanding of the terminology and rules of the games being discussed. It is hard to answer a question when 100 posts into a thread, it becomes evident that you have been showing your dog the guns, after multiple adamant protests to the contrary, simply because what you consider pointing out guns, is not what you think you are doing. You have even been using a cue when doing so, on long marks. Had you mentioned what you've been doing, in your original post, much of the back and forth in this thread could have been avoided. Much clearer communication helps, from the get go, with people as well as dogs. Had you said, in your original post, that you are using "way out" when showing your dog a long, difficult mark, and asked about a cue when later sending the dog for that mark, the responses maybe would have been simpler and more useful.


Was that necessary other than for you to create an alternative narrative?


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Tobias said:


> Gotcha.
> 
> Well, I would suspect many, if not most dogs, would do exactly as yours did when first introduced to a cue that uses the same word, but has different meanings. Heel is another that comes to mind. Here, too.
> 
> ...





DL said:


> Was that necessary other than for you to create an alternative narrative?


Man you are an argument son of a gun. Some people on this thread including Kim, are honestly trying to understand your question and give helpful advise. You seem to take offense at everything.


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

John Robinson said:


> Man you are an argument son of a gun. Some people on this thread including Kim, are honestly trying to understand your question and give helpful advise. You seem to take offense at everything.


You can't fix stupid...


----------



## Brad (Aug 4, 2009)

Why argue with some one who doesn't have a name?


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Man you are an argument son of a gun. Some people on this thread including Kim, are honestly trying to understand your question and give helpful advise. You seem to take offense at everything.


I complimented her and valued her input. You may have picked the wrong quote.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

A lot of people don't have names, just letting him-her know that there are numerous people on here trying to answer his question. No need to take offense.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Brad said:


> Why argue with some one who doesn't have a name?


I don't see your name.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> A lot of people don't have names, just letting him-her know that there are numerous people on here trying to answer his question. No need to take offense.


I got your point. I didn't need to take offense to the most recent comment you were probably referencing to.


----------



## Brad (Aug 4, 2009)

Easy enough to find if you look at our retriever clubs.
Brad Stricklin


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DL said:


> Was that necessary other than for you to create an alternative narrative?


My phone may have screwed up, the above quote was attached to Kim's post, so I thought it was an odd reply.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Daren Galloway said:


> You can't fix stupid...


The thread has come full circle.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> My phone may have screwed up, the above quote was attached to Kim's post, so I thought it was an odd reply.


It was but you quoted Tobias. Tobias is always delightful. Not the best word for it, but anyway.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Brad said:


> Easy enough to find if you look at our retriever clubs.
> Brad Stricklin


I have no need to look you up. The fact is your name isn't on your profile and you called me out on mine not being on mine out of the blue. I am sure you can see the oddness of that.


----------

