Comparison of obedience training methods?

Question

Comparison of obedience training methods?

Answer 1

The method of Obedience training I use- The Koehler Method of Dog Training- has a dog ready to compete and win in Novice Level Obedience in 10 weeks.

I have done this with several dogs who won their classes and titled in three tries.



Open is about 12 weeks to be competition ready.



Utility is about 16 weeks.



There is proofing,proofing and more proofing with this method. We embrace distractions and go out of our way to find them and invent new ones.



I had to laugh while I was at my breeds Nationals this year.



In the "Rally" classes everyone except my dog- had handlers that went through the class as if they were holding an "air hotdog". Of course the dogs were smart enough to realize no food was forthcoming, and performed appropriately.



Meanwhile my dog earned two perfect scores of 100 and we were swarmed as we came out of the ring by fellow exhibitors to compliment us on our performance, and asking how I trained my dog.



The "lure" people actually go into the ring HOPING their dog will perform, with no expectations. I can not imagine going into the ring thinking that, I KNOW my dog will perform and perform well.



As I say, the proof is in the pudding.



In real life I know my dogs training can save their life, since there are many occassions where obeying on one command and one only really counts.



http://www.koehlerdogtraining.com



ADD: TJ you are right (as you always are)

I tell people that Koehler method is like a language or algebra. It has logical progression, step by step.

If you follow the steps as they are laid out, the results are amazing.



I have watched with hundreds upon hundreds of dogs, and the people that follow the method and do their homework have spectacular results.

Answer 2

If you have a couple of years to train a dog, I am sure there are merits to the first idea, although it does leave for some MAJOR gaps which I dont want to get into now.

The second idea has been tried and proven the world over for almost 100 years and we know it works.



There is a reason that first idea is not widely used by pro trainers that train client dogs and have 3-4 weeks to do basic, on-leash OB...it would not work.

There is a reason that idea is also not used to train police dogs, etc...you have 8 weeks to basically train one in OB, protection, building search, area search, tracking, article search and obstacle course...good luck with luring and food!! Hope I helped.



ADD: FINALLY, I have seen the light....thank you TJ...holy sht...someone gets it...YES!!!!!!!!!!

This is THE best answer I have seen in reference to the Koehler method of training, EVER, period, end of!!!

TJ is 10000% correct, Uhave2Be, I know you are a proud member of the Koehler club, congrats.

For ANYONE that has any question, doubts, whatever, read TJ's answer, it will explain it all!!

TJ, frame that answer and keep it, I know I am, and use it again and again.

This ladies and gentlemen is what seperates the men from the boys, the voice of experience and even though I have been doing this for 31 years, I am not deaf nor blind nor too proud to bow down to the wisdom and experience TJ has shown in his answer.

TJ, I almost got crucified when I suggested that the dog you posted about should not have been sent to the Middle East and that she is indeed a waste of tax payer money!!!

Answer 3

I have not read Koehler yet but it is on my list.



But in relation to Lizzie's answer, I am currently reading Jean Donaldson's Culture Clash. Basically she sells the first method Jen talks about along with clickers. She clearly states in her book this take longer than correction based training.

As for the "we don't hit kids for not getting A's", please, There are so many reasons why that argument is flawed. Children aren't dogs and dogs aren't children. Aside from the fact I don't believe that purely positive reinforcement works in child raising either. Personally i think that is part of the problem with the newer generations, the sense of entitlement, that they should be rewarded simply for showing up, but that is another issue. There has to be consequences. We tailor those consequences to whatever we are training. If we could talk to dogs, if they could understand they aren't getting their favorite chew toy because they didn't come when called, then maybe leash corrections wouldn't be necessary.



I HAVE learned about clicker training and Positive reinforcement based training. I've read Karen Pryor, Jean Donaldson, Patricia McConnell, all those who push this.



For me it isn't about how fast they learn or what ribbons they win, it about what works.



I am tired of being told my dogs aren't happy or don't "love" me or trust me or are afraid of me because I use corrections. That is complete and utter bullsh*t.

Answer 4

This is a debate that will be around until the end of time. One must consider that what works for one dog does NOT work for another. With that said, I have trained my personal dogs faster with the Koehler Method. However, I have trained many many more dogs with this method vs marker training. For the record...I do use corrections in marker training as well. Soooo? I don't know, I guess it puts me in the middle LOL.



The one thing I have noticed is when I use marker training I CAN use it on an 8wk old pup with astonishing results, they are EAGER to learn! But they go through their phases and forget manners etc and require correction later thru the teenage years. So long as a good foundation base is built we slide over that hurdle no problem.



I also want to say that prior to 4 years ago I have had only ONE puppy from 8 wks old. ALL my other dogs where older pups (8mos or older) that I fostered/took in and all were trained fast with Koehler and NILIF methods. These were all either overactive, hard headed labs or bully, rottie type breeds. Most with some degree of aggression issues.



When I got into my Cavaliers Koehler was not working. I ended up with dogs that melted and wanted to suck up. (which I cannot stand) I'd give them a VERY mild correction and they would climb as close to me as possible with a fast wagging tail between the legs, rounded back and licking me submissively, trying to get up to my face. SO, I researched marker training. The results where just what I needed to match the Cavs super soft personality. Yes, with my older Cavs even, it took longer for them to become fully trained but is that due to training technique or the dogs mentality and smarts? LOL! I adore my Cavaliers but I must say it is so refreshing to have my AB. She is the type of dog I work with and mesh easily with. If we are out walking and she pulls I CAN do a quick about turn...she just goes...OH CRAP better catch up! My Cavaliers will round up and sulk or shut down completely with something so simple.



What I am trying to say is...every dog is so different! Personalities must be taken into consideration. For those of you who are only accustomed to large breeds or higher drive toy breeds I am sure you have had great results with Koehler. But if you have ever had a soft dog that rounds up or resorts to a crate, just because you raised your voice, you will know that strictly based Koehler methods are not the best route. Stuffing food in their mouth and not disciplining will get you no where either IMO. But a good trainer/dog knowledgeable person can think outside the box and do what is right for the dog they are working with.



Knowing what I know now...I do prefer a REAL dog. One that is not soft at all, bullheaded is ok with me :). I can train them fast and effortlessly with Koehler based methods. I also find that overall it is less time consuming. I am only human and I have lost my temper and kicked a dog or two in the @ss. I want the dog to go "Gez, what was your problem?" and not "OMG that b1 tch scares me! I better RUN" Haha (that was a joke!) IMHO, when it comes to a working dog...marker training gave dogs, that previously would have been culled, the ability to work in an area. Such as the dog that TJ posted. Had she not have been trained with a soft happy little aura despite the fact she was going to work in the pitfall of doggy hell, she probably would have been culled. That dog, would probably make an excellent therapy dog not a bomb dog! Obviously she was way too weak for the job at hand.

Answer 5

The first method you listed, I didn't really understand.



The second one is the one I use. For me it doesn't take long to train a dog. I don't train dogs for a living. I just always did it for fun, ever since I was 8 years old and I got a tv tape about training your puppy that I got in the mail for buying purina dog food. lolz

But I just always trained every pet we got for fun. I trained my dogs and my friends dogs. And my friends parents were amazed at how fast I trained their dogs. One of them even paid me even though I didn't ask for any money. It was actually pretty cool. :)

But anyways, now I train my dogs using this method. And the dogs in my rescue, I train them too. It keeps me busy, and it makes people want to adopt them more. Its cool.



But as for how long it takes to train them, it depends on what I'm training them to do. Basic tricks like sit, stay, come, shake, speak, lay down...... takes a few hours. House breaking takes about a week or so. Leash training, it depends on whether the dog has ever been on a leash before. If it has, then it takes a couple days. If it hasn't, it takes a couple weeks. Bad behaviours such as biting, jumping, and stealing food off your plate usually takes a while because its so ingrained in their heads that its acceptable, but usually doesn't take more than a couple months.



Edit: @TJ- What is Koehler? I'm interested in giving that a look. :)

Answer 6

With the first method it could take months since the dog has to figure out the ignoring and redirecting is just confusing, so I really can't give an accurate amount of time. Maybe I am just to impatient to fool around with this form.



The second method, with the dogs that I have competed with in obedience would take about one to two months before the dog would be proofed and ready to compete. Depending on the age and over all attitude.It is direct and to the point of what you want and how you expect the dog to obey.

Answer 7

The problem I see with Koehler type training is that it is so rigid and outdated. I've read many of his books, and they are like tunnel vision. His training works on some dogs, but give him a shy or timid dog, and he'd be screwed. A good modern trainer has a whole variety of techniques to use depending on the temperament of the dog.

Answer 8

Koehler training is crap...it works, but so does torture, dynamiting fish, and bear traps...



Koehler's methods were for MWDs and PSDs right? Well the military NOR most PDs use Koehler Method anymore...enough said.



Also Lackland is SCRAPPING their Belgian Malinois program :)



Ignoring behavior is NOT proofing, the dog will NEVER be proofed.



The second way of training works, but Koehler people don't reward dogs. Praise is NOT reward, praise simply builds drive, it is not seen as a reward to be earned, but rather, positive motivation to try harder. You should be able to train a dog without ever pushing, pulling, or otherwise physically influencing it.



I don't push butts down, force pups into downs, I don't teach them to heel by changing direction sharply and correcting simultaneously...none of that. I never lay a hand on them to teach them anything. I lure them into positions, say yes and treat. Later the lure becomes less extravagant and exaggerated, yes, then treat. Eventually I just use a command, no luring at all. Tada, dog is trained, I never touched him. No corrections ever. Later, when the dog is mature enough for corrections, if he's sloppy, not paying attention, or purposely blowing commands, THEN I correct him, THEN I put hands on him.



The thinking behind teaching with 0 stress, and proofing with the least amount of stress possible is common sense. Jerking on pups and forcing them into positions while saying words they don't understand is stressful, and uncalled for. The only argument I've ever heard given against training positively with reward is "Oh the dog will only listen if you have a cookie!" well be happy! Because now you have an honest excuse to correct your dog if he knows a command but refuses it because you don't have a treat, DUH. How hard of a solution was that to the simple problem of your pup only listening for a cookie?



I trained my latest pup with "cookies", he's a year old now, and he KNOWS, cookie or no cookie, what I say goes, and if I'm not obeyed there will be swift and decisive consequences.



Again, I'll put the training of my 1 year old puppy against ANYBODY'S who does Koehler training. My dog will give me more focus, be faster and more accurate than yours, AND have fun doing it. Koehler method = training out of repetition and avoidance of correction. Modern method (reward based, corrections to proof) = training by using a dogs innate drives.



Look at a Schutzhund dog track...he's slow, methodical, and doesn't look happy. Why? Because Schutzhund tracking is forced tracking. Now look at a good SAR dog, he's running full tilt, nose to the ground, in full drive, tuning out the rest of the World, and is very excited. Why? Because he's been trained to track in drive. If I threaten you with being fired to work, you'll work hard enough to blend into the pack of other workers and keep your job. If I offer a $2,000 bonus for good work, you'll be tripping over yourself trying to do better work, as fast as possible.



Koehler Method works AGAINST a dog's natural drive. It teaches him to suppress drive and obey the handler with force.



Modern Method works WITH a dogs natural drive. And teaches a dog behaviors with a 0 stress atmosphere, and insures the dog knows he MUST obey the commands he's been taught with force.



Working against mother nature may "work", but working with her makes life MUCH easier...in the end both require some force/stress. But option 2 involves a fraction of the force required with Koehler Method, and is more "fair" because the dog is taught the behavior prior to you ever touching him during training. How that can be argued against is beyond me and beyond sense...



In the name of furthering everyone's understanding of dog training...I implore ANYONE who has anything to say other than the oh so reliable "If you train with cookies the dog will only listen for cookies" to speak up. I've explained how to transition the dog from "listening for cookies" to obeying unquestioningly without a reward of any kind present, in drive. So please, someone find a legitimate flaw in Modern Technique...one that is addressed and corrected with Koehler Method. Any takers?



-edit- TJ I said address something FLAWED in Modern methods of teaching behavior with reward, and proofing with correction. I did not ask about 20 dogs who train in the same field of training. Sporting dogs and their owners are all about heritage. The old ways. People train their dogs with methods their great grandfathers used and shoot the same double barreled shotgun too even though there are more advanced guns to be had.



Are you saying a dog can't be trained to do what those 20 dogs did with using food/reward to "teach" and corrections to enforce? I remember being taught as a kid by my father (bred pointers) how to train the forced retrieve and how it was the ONLY way to get a dog to retrieve (Koehler style). I haven't trained a forced retrieve in 4 or 5 years and I've yet to have a dog bungle one in competition yet. You named 20 dogs by 1 person. I can name 20 dogs by one person to have done note worthy things and have been trained with food (Helmut Raiser). I can also name a friend who is qualified to be BOTH a Sch judge and AKC OB judge and has the won the Distinguished AKC Dog World Award with his Rottweiler Roxanne, somebody who went to the Nationals in Sch 9 times (and qualified 12 times), was a member of the WUSV World Team for the USA, and had (I think) 2008's youngest dog in the Schutzhund Nationals (Chico Stanford). I can also name people who've won and placed with several dogs in multiple disciplines who don't use Koehler Method. So we can throw around names and championship wins all day. Frankly training AKC novices to UD and winning the Distinguish Dog World Award, serving for the USA on the WUSV World team and qualifying 12 times to go to the Sch Nationals with several different dogs including handler owned and trained and bred by AND females is more demanding than 20 field dogs. But I don't want to be too quick to judgement. I only went to 1 retriever competition...it looked like all you needed was a dog with a good stay and knew how to forge ahead, come around, and go left and right to find bumpers in the reeds. I don't know exactly what discipline it was but that's all I remember.



The offer still stands to point out something that can't be taught with Modern Technique that CAN be taught with Koehler.





-edit- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK7Bk4vPk00



Doesn't look too hard to me...I could definitely do that with no pressure. I can do a send out and run the blinds with a 12 week old pup using makers, I'm sure I could do this.



Secondly, I'm not a shotgun guy. But I've got and had my share of Kimber, Ed Brown, Les Baer, Springfield, and Colt 1911's of varying value, not to mention my custom built AR-15's...some of the 1911's valued high enough to buy you a new truck to put your dogs in, and a trailer for an ATV. BUT, nice to think you know me!



-edit- I like that explanation better, BUT, you forget I do REAL WORLD tracking where I command a dog to go in different directions regardless if I'm in sight or not or where I am, I do believe they would do the same in water (they will in waist deep snow and once in a swamp...long story, but it wasn't that deep, mostly muck). I still think I could train the mechanics of it with motivational methods. And I never said NO pressure, I DO believe in applying pressure in training...re-read my answer if you doubt that. I'm saying I don't believe that I HAVE to apply pressure to teach the mechanics and basics of anything, and as of yet, I do not. Perhaps I'll give the swim -by a closer look next summer!



-add- TJ we'd have to finish this in e-mail. I've never been a fan of using pressure to event problems in the future. I'd rather them manifest, then take care of them, that way the dog knows EXACTLY what he is to do and what he isn't.

Answer 9

Dog training are excellent and very helpful to build you a stronger relationship with your dog. Read more https://tr.im/aIpsV



After I started training my dog, he became very attached to me and loves to stay by side as long as he can. But just going to them won't help. You have to practice what they teach you outside of the class and you need to keep up with it at least every now and then after the class ends otherwise they'll just go back to previous habits. This course is a really good place to go for dog obedience classes. It get's your dog around other people and dogs to socialize while getting the training you need. As for electric collars, I would say to not get one. In my experience, they're only a negative effect on your dog. I mean of course you're going to need to correct your dog, but being positive and encouraging your dog works a lot faster and easier.



Every dog is different, so unless you have a german shepherd or a really smart dog, it might take a while to train her. You might get frustrated with her, but go easy. She's still a puppy and has a lot of energy. A backyard or somewhere to run will help her get rid of a lot of energy that might cause her to misbehave from boredom.

Answer 10

I'll repeat ---- the training PROGRAM that you apply to whatever training method you choose to use is more important than the training method it's self. Can't hardly teach "stay" before you teach "sit" now can you. So map out the progression of your program first!

The speed of any training method is controlled by how well what you last taught leads into what you will teach next.



edit

If people actually go to the trouble to read "Koehler", they will find that it outlines a training PROGRAM (progression) as well as a training METHOD, and that is WHY it works so well.



edit

"Sure, Koehler's method works... sometimes. But realize that he told people that if your dog can't take the stress of his training method you should have it euthanized and get another dog"



There was actually a valid reason for that. The Koehler training program was designed for the training of MWDs. His theory was that if a dog was not capable of withstanding the pressure of training, it would not be capable of withstanding the pressure on the battle field.

This is the results for a dog that wasn't culled from the program when she should have been.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/03/military-dogs-ptsd-air-force-handler-says-yes-mend/



When using Koehler, the severity of the corrections is up to the trainer (and the dog being trained). It is the timing of the corrections that needs to be followed.

The harsh Koehler correction were simply designed to match what the dogs would experience in the field.

When not training MWDs, the severity of a correction should match the severity of the distraction you are trying to overcome.



edit

"TJ, I almost got crucified when I suggested that the dog you posted about should not have been sent to the Middle East and that she is indeed a waste of tax payer money!!!"



That is why the 341st TS has now initiated it's own breeding program. (Belgian Malinois)

http://www.lackland.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090703-007.pdf



Edit

" but Koehler people don't reward dogs. Praise is NOT reward, praise simply builds drive, it is not seen as a reward to be earned, but rather, positive motivation to try harder."



Curtis

Wanna bet!?!

The top section is a pup (up to about 6 months)

Read the top two lines of the center column.

Those of us that use Koehler also know how to keep training age appropriate, or do you think we are stupid or something?!?

This Rex Carr based training program actually predated Koehler, and is what Koehler is based on.

http://www.totalretriever.com/rj/totalretPDF.pdf

Corrections start with what we call "Basics".

As you can see, the training "program" can be altered to fit the needs of any type of dog.



"Also Lackland is SCRAPPING their Belgian Malinois program "



News to me! I was there three weeks ago, and they had pups at that time! And, litters planed.



edit

"So please, someone find a legitimate flaw in Modern Technique...one that is addressed and corrected with Koehler Method. Any takers?"



Ya, I'll take you up on that anytime.

But I will refrain from saying what I'm thinking!

Here is ALL the proof that I need!

http://www.totalretriever.com/20champs.htm

That's 20 National titles by one trainer using Koehler like training methods.

In fact There has never been a Retriever NFC or NAFC that was not trained using Koehler like training programs.

Nuf said!



edit

Guess you need to take a closer look at the top section of this!

http://www.totalretriever.com/rj/totalretPDF.pdf

I think you might have missed the part about "simple obedience with treats", and "casting games with treats"

Where in the hell did you ever get the idea that Koehler style training is against the use of marking or rewarding.



But since you asked for a specific: Teach "swim-by" without the use of pressure! (that is of course if you even know what swim-by even is)

Believe me, if you want to get into advanced modern training, I'll leave you in the dust.

Try teaching some Beagles not to run trash if you want to learn how foolish your statement actually is!



BTW the two barrels on my shotguns are stacked vertically.

Mine were made by Perazzi (12ga) and Beretta (20ga), wanna meet me at the trap range and see how well your "more modern" one stacks up??

A Perazzi can easily cost as much as your house!

http://www.shootingsports.com/perazzi/images/game12g.gif

Go here, if you want to see what REAL shooters use!

http://www.perazzi.com/Pages/en_perazzi_home_page_inglese.aspx



edit

ROFL

Swim-by is about teaching a "set' of fundamental skills -- and the prevention of undesired behaviors from forming.

This is "swim-by"

http://www.retrieversonline.com/swimby.htm

There is NO WAY that you will teach those skills to a dog -any dog- without the use of pressure. believe me, many have tried.

A dogs natural desire is to exit the water early, it is an unnatural act for a dog to continue swimming past the handler. It also prevents balks, pops, and refusals.

I can only conclude that you have no clue of the WHY to teach swim-by with the use of pressure.

You see, swim-by is a foundation skill that only after being mastered allows for the teaching of upper level water casting.



edit

"I'm saying I don't believe that I HAVE to apply pressure to teach the mechanics and basics of anything,"



Perhaps the one thing that Denny doesn't make clear enough in that article is what the pressure does, and why we apply it when we do.

Think about what portion of Operant Conditioning is being applied. Most people are going to guess wrong and say Negative Reinforcement -- can't be -- something was added! It has to be either Positive Reinforcement or Positive Punishment.

Positive Punishment was used to prevent an undesirable behavior from happening. (no-go's, pops, and cast refusals)

So-- the real reason for using pressure when teaching isn't to "teach the mechanics and basics", it's to prevent the bad habbits that dogs will develop while learning the " mechanics and basics".

Now we are right back to where I started with this "book"

"If people actually go to the trouble to read "Koehler", they will find that it outlines a training PROGRAM (progression) as well as a training METHOD, and that is WHY it works so well."

(how does what you are teaching at the moment fit into the whole)



Want to see what happens when a dog has NOT been through swim-by? They are trying to get the dog to take a strait line across the points, not suppose to be a goat roping contest.

Starts at 3:45

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

Answer 11

Excellent conversation, one of the best I've seen here. Very well thought out, mature answers, very little antagonism.



I can't speak for obedience training, just guide work training. The first method takes longer at first, but we still finish dogs in the same amount of time as with the other method. We save dogs that would have been released with harsher treatment, and get very nice, happy, relaxed guides that are easy to control. This is very important, as we're breeding softer dogs for our older, more fragile clientele. The behaviors last reliably. My dogs walk past food on the ground in the street, knowing they might get a reward at the other side when they get to the curb. They may not, too - variable reward is powerful. And they will get a correction if they do try to go for it, but will get a chance to do it right.



Like all guide dog schools, In the old days we had knuckle heads that were trained up just fine with more traditional methods - no food, tons of correction. I'm happy to say that we're now about 70% PR, 30% compulsion. There has to be compulsion to do this kind of training, to keep our clients safe. But our dogs are much happier and more reliable than they used to be.

Answer 12

Since it has been extensively tested and proven that physical punishment (aka "correction") actually has the effect of SLOWING DOWN learning, I would go with the first method (although clicker is better). A question well worth asking oneself is, Is the use of harsh training methods "okay" because some people think it is faster or that a dog can win ribbons sooner? Would it be "okay" to hit, choke and punish a child for not getting all A's or winning prizes in school competitions? Of course not! And a dog is not nearly as smart as a child and so has a harder time understanding why s/he is being treated so badly.



Sure, Koehler's method works... sometimes. But realize that he told people that if your dog can't take the stress of his training method you should have it euthanized and get another dog...and another...and another, and so on, until you get a dog that can take it. Are ribbons and useless trophies THAT important? Besides, many thousands of people have won ribbons and trophies with dogs trained by far kinder methods. See "Play Training Your Dog" and Morgan Spector's book on clicker training, just for starters.



With traditional training methods, you have to keep the dog in practice, drilling all the time (how boring for dog AND owner) or the dog will gradually forget the lessons. Clicker training, which I know you didn't choose to include in your comparison, offers PERMANENT LEARNING, which will save you a great many hours of practicing. If you like drilling and don't mind inflicting pain on your dog (not a friendly way to treat "man's best friend") in the name of "training" (by outdated methods; Koehler died a long time ago, Milan learned outdated methods from his father, and both methods are based on the World War 2 ways of training war dogs) then I suppose you won't bother to learn clicker or other positive reinforcement training methods well, and so you'll never know what you are missing.



As for how long it takes, including proofing, that largely depends on the skills of the trainer involved and the dog's aptitude for what is being taught. But I can tell you this: clicker trained dogs practically BEG to be taught something new and truly enjoy obeying and performing. Koehler complained that he could get EITHER a happy dog or an obedient one but not both in one dog. Dogs have feelings, too. I used to be a Koehler trainer, back in the 1960's, and rather good at it, too, but I did my best to keep up with new discoveries in how dogs learn and dog behavior and I changed my ways.