+R vs Pressure Training (Which do you use?)

[808allday]

I was wondering how many of you use either method of training. I am well aware of the differences so I don't need explanations of each. I was more curious as to your results. If any of you have trained with either method what were the hardest parts of training using this method? What were the greatest triumphs/things the dog just really understood and had mastery of. Has anyone training two different dogs using each method, if so how did training go? How did the dogs do? I already know what I want to use to train my dog and how to do it but I always have an open mind to hear what others have to say and listen to their experiences. This is not a debate on which is humane or inhumane, I just want to know your results and possible hang ups you've encountered.

*NOTE*:I define pressure training as any method of training where physical pressure ideas are used such as shock collars, force fetching, choke chain, prong, pinch collar, half hitched leads etc.
I don't care if this was for a pointer/flusher/retriever/versatile or any other type of dog you can think of

[EvanG]

It sounds like you're asking about operant conditioning, but mixing other terms. The quadrants of OC are pretty well defined, but many people struggle to relate to the terms because they seem contradictory. They aren't really. They just aren't applied the way most people are used to speaking about dog training.

In general terms, I use the following definition.

Pressure; from Webster's, “…the force of one body acting on another by…the continued application of power”, “…to use all one’s influence”.

That does not imply an amount, and that is as it should be. The reason we use pressure/force in dog training is to change behavior. The amount each dog needs for this to happen differs from dog to dog. The ways it is applied vary also, and different dogs react uniquely to the various implements; i.e. heeling stick, e-collar, collar & leash, etc.

Is this the discussion you seek, or are you interested in defining OC?

EvanG

[Winchey]

Everyone uses a mix of all 4 quadrants whether they realize it or not.

[808allday]

I guess my real purpose is is two fold. First, to see how much we are following suit of European training. We always seem to lag behind them in training (and sports but don't get me started on that). Using only +R only for training any sporting breed here in the states is still a minority group. I was trying to get a sample of the users here. I was expecting traditional methods ( examples would be Delmar smiths methods, Wolter's methods, Even hickox which used treats and +R uses shock collar (pressure) conditoning)to be the majority. These tend to be time proven programs that work and very much can win field trials and be great in the field. Secondly, I really wanted an owners perspective on the things they noticed about their dog. The real difference I guess I wanted to see was the result from the dog eager and wanting to please because it has found doing what its owner asks brings the dog a positive experience, vs the dog that wants to please but also really wants to avoid getting punished for doing wrong (shock collar, pinch collar etc). When I say pressure I am not always talking about a physical pressure being put on the dog. The basic principle of pressure on pressure off is first established using OC with a choke chain, pinch collar, pinching dogs ears etc and then this idea is applied to the shock collar via electrical stimulation. aka if the dog wants to avoid something unpleasant it better do what you ask. Now in England (and I know their field trials are different) using +R only has really taken hold and they've had many champions using this method. No one knows a dog like its owner does and so I want to know if anyone has noticed a difference in their dogs which were trained one way vs dogs training the other, or even if a mix of training produced a different dog. This may be hard to get a direct answer from since every dogs attitude, work ethic, and temperament is different but I'm looking for a more general, generic answer. I've noticed that professional trainers have started taking a turn away from mostly negative enforcement. For example Bill West and Maurice Lindley really started using low pressure training using a mix of +R (mostly with birds as a prize or treat with praise) but still mixed in the pinch collar,check cord, and e-collar to finish the dog. With the founding of the Positive Gun Dog Association as well as +R trainers starting to become big I want to know peoples experience with these systems. Obviously the old style of training with pinch collars, check cords, ear pinching, toe pulling, and force fetching works. We've been using it for generations. But I am one of those people that will challenge and research everything, I am not going to simply accept a system because it is tradition or because it is "what works". I want the best gun dog I can get, whether that means going against traditional training or not. Everyone can be nit picky and say for example that not getting shocked by the shock collar for doing something right is +R, but if you think this then I don't think you understand what +R training is about.
So in summary, I am looking for owners experiences with these methods as I have described them (please stay within my definitions, if you feel this can't be done explain why). Explain any different behavioral elements you may have noticed in these dogs. Maybe your dog performed better in the field than a dog trained another way, I would love to hear about it maybe even with some detailed examples. Like I said no one knows a dog like its owner, if you've noticed anything from a different attitude about birds, or out in the field, or even around the house please share.

Here is a personal example of what I'm looking for.

I can tell you personally that when I adopted a Lab puppy from the shelter I trained her using a combination of methods. I used +R to mold or shape the command or trick and the speed at which she learned was amazing. I ended up with a dog eager to please, yes at first for treats but as I faded the treats out and it turned into petting or fetch with a toy as the prize. When it comes to obedience I had the attitude that those commands were there not only for my benefit as an owner but also for the dogs safety. If I tell my dog to stay or tell her down I expect her to do this immediately no questions asked. I've used it to avoid her going near dangerous dogs that come to the dog park every so often (stupid owners who bring aggressive dogs to the park) as well as to stop her from chasing birds into the street and getting hit by a car. So I used pressure training using a pinch collar once the commands were taught to reinforce this. I ended up with the best dog I've ever had. People frequently commented on how well behaved she was and how well she listened. There were very few times I ever had to ask twice for a command or a trick, she was just a happy go lucky dog that loved to please. So this is my experience with this so far. In my family my grandfather has raised GSP's for 50 years. For a long time he used harsher pressure based training and as the years went by kept getting lighter and lighter on the pressure training. I can say he would tell me he definitely has seen a change in demeanor of the dogs he first started out with compared to the ones he hunts and trains with today from the field to living at home. The best way I can describe this is in the way that the dogs just show more personality and liveliness.

[Chukar12]

I can tell you personally that when I adopted a Lab puppy from the shelter I trained her using a combination of methods. I used +R to mold or shape the command or trick and the speed at which she learned was amazing. I ended up with a dog eager to please, yes at first for treats but as I faded the treats out and it turned into petting or fetch with a toy as the prize. When it comes to obedience I had the attitude that those commands were there not only for my benefit as an owner but also for the dogs safety. If I tell my dog to stay or tell her down I expect her to do this immediately no questions asked. I've used it to avoid her going near dangerous dogs that come to the dog park every so often (stupid owners who bring aggressive dogs to the park) as well as to stop her from chasing birds into the street and getting hit by a car. So I used pressure training using a pinch collar once the commands were taught to reinforce this. I ended up with the best dog I've ever had. People frequently commented on how well behaved she was and how well she listened. There were very few times I ever had to ask twice for a command or a trick, she was just a happy go lucky dog that loved to please. So this is my experience with this so far. In my family my grandfather has raised GSP's for 50 years. For a long time he used harsher pressure based training and as the years went by kept getting lighter and lighter on the pressure training. I can say he would tell me he definitely has seen a change in demeanor of the dogs he first started out with compared to the ones he hunts and trains with today from the field to living at home. The best way I can describe this is in the way that the dogs just show more personality and liveliness.

Any type of educating requires a change in behavior or pressure. When more than one being is involved there is compromise...and while I could get lengthy with this I will try and discipline myself. I think compromising with a dog is a bad idea. The species and language barrier is formidable. I am a clicker training guy, a let pup run amuck for 6 or 8 month guy with mostly positive experiences to shape behavior. When maturity begins to set in, so does my insistence that my pups understand that the world has restrictions in it. A completely self-centered dog will handle the world much like a self-centered human. I offer that the trend of child rearing has tilted fulcrum past the productive point.

Trials and hunting put pressure on a dog to perform under rules that are converse to the natural order of their predatory nature. Furthermore, in nature canines cannot escape correction in their education from their own kind. I believe there are better ways to train dogs than we employed in previous years, and in years to come more ways will emerge, different from what we have today that will indeed be more progressive and perhaps described as "better." However, trash running, the joy of the chase, a dog standing a bird he knows he could catch are all items that will require applied discipline, because no biscuit or pat on the head is sweeter than the thrill of the catch for a predator.

[808allday]

I can tell you personally that when I adopted a Lab puppy from the shelter I trained her using a combination of methods. I used +R to mold or shape the command or trick and the speed at which she learned was amazing. I ended up with a dog eager to please, yes at first for treats but as I faded the treats out and it turned into petting or fetch with a toy as the prize. When it comes to obedience I had the attitude that those commands were there not only for my benefit as an owner but also for the dogs safety. If I tell my dog to stay or tell her down I expect her to do this immediately no questions asked. I've used it to avoid her going near dangerous dogs that come to the dog park every so often (stupid owners who bring aggressive dogs to the park) as well as to stop her from chasing birds into the street and getting hit by a car. So I used pressure training using a pinch collar once the commands were taught to reinforce this. I ended up with the best dog I've ever had. People frequently commented on how well behaved she was and how well she listened. There were very few times I ever had to ask twice for a command or a trick, she was just a happy go lucky dog that loved to please. So this is my experience with this so far. In my family my grandfather has raised GSP's for 50 years. For a long time he used harsher pressure based training and as the years went by kept getting lighter and lighter on the pressure training. I can say he would tell me he definitely has seen a change in demeanor of the dogs he first started out with compared to the ones he hunts and trains with today from the field to living at home. The best way I can describe this is in the way that the dogs just show more personality and liveliness.

Any type of educating requires a change in behavior or pressure. When more than one being is involved there is compromise...and while I could get lengthy with this I will try and discipline myself. I think compromising with a dog is a bad idea. The species and language barrier is formidable. I am a clicker training guy, a let pup run amuck for 6 or 8 month guy with mostly positive experiences to shape behavior. When maturity begins to set in, so does my insistence that my pups understand that the world has restrictions in it. A completely self-centered dog will handle the world much like a self-centered human. I offer that the trend of child rearing has tilted fulcrum past the productive point.

Trials and hunting put pressure on a dog to perform under rules that are converse to the natural order of their predatory nature. Furthermore, in nature canines cannot escape correction in their education from their own kind. I believe there are better ways to train dogs than we employed in previous years, and in years to come more ways will emerge, different from what we have today that will indeed be more progressive and perhaps described as "better." However, trash running, the joy of the chase, a dog standing a bird he knows he could catch are all items that will require applied discipline, because no biscuit or pat on the head is sweeter than the thrill of the catch for a predator.

Yeah I can see what you mean, I best relate this whole thing to my childhood. As a kid my parents would sometimes let me learn on my own but they would also have authority over me. When they asked or told me to do something I knew how to do (ex. clean my room,take out the trash, do the dishes etc) I was expected to do it. If i decided not to I would get a punishment, whether it was a spanking or maybe being grounded from certain items etc. In no way did they ever ask me to do something that I didn't benefit from (that I could receive punishment for not doing anyway). Taking out the trash benefited me just as much as everyone else, as well as doing the dishes and cleaning my room. I like to think I turned out pretty good. I respect and love my family, I've never gotten in too much trouble, got good grades through school based on the discipline I was taught. Yes I got good things for behaving well and doing what I was asked, but it wasn't the toys or prizes that made me want to do these things, or necessarily the fear of punishment, so much as wanting to make my parents and family proud. The more I've thought about I think why shouldn't this be the same way when bringing up anything young. I personally tie this over directly to my dog. There are obvious differences between a human and a dog but they function much the same way that I did as a kid (minus the whole language barrier and wanting to poop on the carpet :p) I've brought these philosophies into my training and found this to be successful in teaching and getting a dog that respects you and responds, carrying these principles into maturity. Compared to dogs that are only ever taught anything with a pinch collar or choke chain I've found my dogs to be more expressive and less afraid to try new experiences and learn new things.

Thanks for your input Chyukar12, you bring up some valid points and I can relate.

[DoubleBarrel GunDogs]

I strongly believe that shaping a behavior with positive reinforcement, and later making a transition to the e-collar (avoidance training), is preferable to teaching a dog to learn a behavior by avoiding stimulation. I also believe that a pup trained with positive reinforcement will develop into a dog that can deal with pressure better than a pup that was trained with more traditional methods.

What I don't believe is that a dog is motivated to please anyone or anything but itself. A dogs behavior is the result of what works for it. Be that in the form of a treat, a pat on the head, or avoidance to electronic stimulation. This self centered thinking becomes even more evident when birds are involved. You will never get a dog steady to flush, just because he adores you. He does it because you convince him to.

Nate

[EvanG]

I guess my real purpose is two fold. First, to see how much we are following suit of European training. We always seem to lag behind them in training (and sports but don't get me started on that).

Where on earth did you get that impression? How are you measuring that perception of European superiority? Please be aware that it’s probably been over 30 years since a truly European-style trained dog has achieved a field championship in the US.

Using only +R only for training any sporting breed here in the states is still a minority group. I was trying to get a sample of the users here. I was expecting traditional methods (examples would be Delmar smiths methods, Wolter's methods, Even Hickox which used treats and +R uses shock collar (pressure) conditioning to be the majority. These tend to be time proven programs that work and very much can win field trials and be great in the field.

”Great in the field” is purely subjective. None of the three programs you’ve cited are adequate to produce a field champion. It would be rare for them to produce a QAA dog. We seem to be wandering around in theory in this conversation, rather than rooting our claims in fact. It’s popular for dog folks to do that, but it rarely guides the dialogue forward.

Secondly, I really wanted an owner’s perspective on the things they noticed about their dog. The real difference I guess I wanted to see was the result from the dog eager and wanting to please because it has found doing what its owner asks brings the dog a positive experience, vs the dog that wants to please but also really wants to avoid getting punished for doing wrong (shock collar, pinch collar etc).

My first two trained dogs were both Labradors. Decently bred, stylish, and talented marking dogs. I trained them both initially by virtue of a passive, so-called R+ method. Through age 2 neither had managed to finish a Derby; the lowest stake in a US field trial. I was introduced to the late Hall of Fame trainer D.L. Walters (NEVER to be confused with Richard Wolters). After one winter’s work with D.L. both my dogs won Qualifyings, and became QAA (Qualified All-Age). That was quite an improvement in overall performance, and both remained very stylish.

However, as good as that was, both those dogs should have been field champions by virtue of their talent level. What was missing was a modern, sequential program, and the high level of precision they produce when properly applied. But there is a point that can and usually is missed in conversations like this; balance. No program or course of training will regularly produce both precise and stylish dogs unless they are applied fairly and in a balanced manner.

Now in England (and I know their field trials are different) using +R only has really taken hold and they've had many champions using this method.

You’re right. Their trials are different, and their criteria for an FC is different. I strongly doubt even the best of them would have much chance of finishing a US all-age stake, let alone becoming a field champion here. The demands are much greater in virtually all areas. If you’re beginning to doubt this I urge you to attend a few US trials.

Here is a personal example of what I'm looking for.

I can tell you personally that when I adopted a Lab puppy from the shelter I trained her using a combination of methods. I used +R to mold or shape the command or trick and the speed at which she learned was amazing. I ended up with a dog eager to please, yes at first for treats but as I faded the treats out and it turned into petting or fetch with a toy as the prize.…. For a long time he used harsher pressure based training and as the years went by kept getting lighter and lighter on the pressure training. I can say he would tell me he definitely has seen a change in demeanor of the dogs he first started out with compared to the ones he hunts and trains with today from the field to living at home. The best way I can describe this is in the way that the dogs just show more personality and liveliness.

I would bet that the pressure issues that concern you are less a result of pressure, and more a result of out of balance training. You can over-pressure and subdue a dog with an e-collar, a heeling stick, or even a rolled up newspaper. Or you can use any or all of the same implements, and produce a happy, stylish, eager, precise worker. It’s much less a matter of which tools you use than it is a matter of how you use them, and in what balance with teaching and praise.

“Leave something in it for the dog.” Rex Carr

EvanG

[ezzy333]

It’s much less a matter of which tools you use than it is a matter of how you use them.

No truer words were ever spoken.

Ezzy

[Trekmoor]

I think some of you lads are reading or listening to a bit too much propaganda if you think field trailers in Britain do not use "Pressure Training." Most of the trial dogs here are "pressure" trained. I do not use e-collars or any other pressure training aids that seem to be common in America, all I use is a lead, a whistle, dummies, a lot of thought and a fair amount of shoe leather. I never train F.F. either but I would still describe myself as a "Pressure Trainer." Most British trailers are a bit like me, they use a mixture of pressure and praise .

I fully agree that it is very unlikely that a British field trial trained lab would win in American field trials. We rarely need that kind of retrieve "exactness" ....for want of a better word. However, from what I have read of American trials and American trial dogs I also think it is equally unlikely that an American trained trial dog would do well in our trials. Both countries expect different things of their trial dogs.

Bill T.

[mask]

An old time trainer that is still training today told me that dogs learn four ways, pain, fear, praise, and repetition. The more you can use praise and repetition the better.

[gonehuntin']

You can't train a dog with "crickets and cookies", nor can you train one with brutality. All competent training is a balance. It may tip one way or the other depending on the pooch.