# Training dogs too far



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears. 
I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Georgee said:


> Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
> I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
> Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears.
> I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?


I agree 100% Georgee. I don't think dogs need to do tricks. I think it is undignified and no way would I want my dogs to do stuff like that.

I don't like to see any animal being used in that way, either, like performing seals and stuff you see at Sea World.


----------



## metaldog (Nov 11, 2009)

Training dogs to do tricks is good for dogs. I've a highly intelligent JRT who loves to learn and do tricks for rewards. She has become much more confident through this work and it has increased the bond between dog and human. So long as the dog enjoys it I can't see any harm.

A lot of things are totally pointless if you look at them that way


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

I agree with you but many on here think otherwise.
I think over training can take away the character of the dog in many instances


----------



## alyssa_liss (May 4, 2009)

agree to a degree , however i am wanting to teach max 'tricks' but this is because he has HD so by teaching him 'trick's hes getting some excerise (mental) that isnt going to affect his hips. hes a collie , no idea what yet though


----------



## lucylastic (Apr 9, 2011)

Different dogs have different needs. For some dogs the basics are enough to have a happy well balanced life. For some though, they enjoy learning new things, and some dogs really need the mental challenge of learning and training. I've had calm laid back dogs who never needed to know more than sit, come, wait and leave. Those dogs were completely happy and fulfilled and a pleasure to walk. My current dog, however, would be climbing the walls and bouncing off the ceiling if I didn't keep her mentally challenged.


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

I don't think you can go over the top with training unless you train something dangerous. Dogs need and enjoy the stimulation training bring so if that means being creative in what you teach then thats fine. If everybody only taught the standard what would you teach after 6 months? apart from reinforcing what's already learnt.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

As long as a dog knows the basics, can sit, wait, stayn come, leave and drop
and down, then really for just a pet dog you dont need anything else or thats what I think personally anyway.


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

i could never understand why a person would want to waste time training tricks...... but some dogs enjoy training , training is not work its fun , its mental stimulation for them . a lot of dogs dont need that extra training but im sure there are plenty more who could benifit from a little more input from their owners.


----------



## troublestrouble (Oct 19, 2011)

Trouble just seems to like learning things, well she likes getting treats and she seems to like using her brain and pleasing me to its happy days all round. i wouldnt want to train her to be the 'perfect dog' to the point where we never leaves my side, she never pees me off, she stops having her cheeky moments of stealing things (like one of my slippers i still dont the whereabouts of)

dont think it does any harm, i think if you were beating your dog into doing such things-which i believe is how they train dancing bears-then that's where something is going wrong.

when i train Trouble, she is never told off for doing something wrong, she is never hit or shouted at, she just gets tasty treats when she does something right and at the end of it all she gets a tasty chicken wing to have a munch on, yum!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

PaulRyan said:


> I don't think you can go over the top with training unless you train something dangerous. Dogs need and enjoy the stimulation training bring so if that means being creative in what you teach then thats fine. If everybody only taught the standard what would you teach after 6 months? apart from reinforcing what's already learnt.


You don't need to teach to interact


----------



## Grace_Lily (Nov 28, 2010)

lucylastic said:


> Different dogs have different needs. For some dogs the basics are enough to have a happy well balanced life. For some though, they enjoy learning new things, and some dogs really need the mental challenge of learning and training. I've had calm laid back dogs who never needed to know more than sit, come, wait and leave. Those dogs were completely happy and fulfilled and a pleasure to walk. My current dog, however, would be climbing the walls and bouncing off the ceiling if I didn't keep her mentally challenged.


Completely agree with this, I have grown up with collies and spaniels and they would go stark crazy without mental challenges to occupy their mind; including games and tricks.

If my dogs did not show me they enjoyed these tasks then we wouldn't do that particular task anymore, tricks and games if done correctly are enjoyed by the animal.


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

If the dog is enjoying it then why not 

It's not for me personally - but when I've seen 'dancing' dogs they've always looked really enthusiastic and both owner and dog seem to have a great bond


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Urm - don't guide/disability dogs perform tricks every time they turn on a light, fetch the post? They are all taught like tricks...Well they would be tricks for my dog as I am not blind/deaf/disabled but to some of those people they do serve a purpose. 

Doesn't challenging your dogs intelligence make for a better household?

My dog would have this house to shreds if he wasn't taught tricks to keep his mind busy and tonight he has taken part in a demo at class.. and he enjoyed every minute of it, he loves having an audience.. He had a foot injury and couldn't go out for walks for 2 weeks - so I taught him to open drawers and fetch me a tea towel.. useful for me, mental stimulation for him..

HTM is not a trick, it is not like dancing bears, it isn't cruel - how many of those dogs have been beaten to do that, how many walk around with a "I've been beaten" look on their face? Most of these tricks may serve no purpose, but it builds the relationship with your dog and tbh without teaching Louie tricks my relationship with him would be quite frankly sh!t! It is something fun for us both and not only engages his mind, but I have to engage mine to think up new things, refine things and think how to train things.. 

I disagree completely, my dog would not be fulfilled and we wouldn't have a happy relationship if I only taught sit, stay, leave, down and retrieve.. what a boring life your dog must have if you think like that..(probably shouldn't have said that but let loose at me - not bothered  )

Oh and my dog is trained (low level might I add) in both obedience and gundog work - we are going to carry on with these (when I find a gundog trainer) so he is doing what he is meant to do, however I will still carry on with mentally stimulating him with "meaningless tricks" that "serve no purpose" just 'cos I can


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

I train my dog to do tricks, although I don't think I'd enter competitions. However Ollie loves learning and he adores doing tricks. Once his treat bag come out with his clicker, his tail wags and he starts offering behaviours, which obviously shows he enjoys this interaction and training, and the fact he offers behaviour means he wants to learn and wants to do these tricks.

You can never over train a dog, unless you train the dog to do something dangerous or the dog is clearly not interested in advanced training (however I think in the latter case, its finding what does interest your dog in training).

Also, do you think dogs shouldn't be trained to be sniffer dogs, or police dogs? Or do you think dogs shouldn't be trained to do agility, which most dogs enjoy once introduced to it?


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2012)

Georgee said:


> Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
> I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
> Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears.
> I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?


Im pretty sure from the dogs perspective its ALL tricks 
They dont have the same sense of dignity that we do - certainly mine dont, if they did, Im thinking they wouldnt roll in coyote poop or dead deer guts...

If you train in a way that empowers the dog, the more you train the better IMO. It all builds the bond between dog & owner, makes spending time together meaningful, builds communication, and provides mental stimulation for the dog.

My dogs are clicker trained, and they LOVE seeing the clicker come out. They really dont care what they learn how to do as long as they get to spend time training. Sure, much of what we train is useless, but the bond I build and strengthen with the dogs when I train is priceless.


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


they dont need tricks but i do think some need something to occupy their time or they get bored . i have never considered rollover or dancing to be demeaning , i dont think its quite the same as wild animals that are caught and used as entertainment . for the record my dogs dont rollover or dance but thats just because its not something i tried to teach , not because i felt that for whatever reason they were "bad " things to teach .


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

rona said:


> You don't need to teach to interact


I agree but it does seem imo a very good and enjoyable method to do so, I fail to see why some don't like it? Storm certainly enjoys it.


----------



## metaldog (Nov 11, 2009)

Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


Jack Russells go bonkers if they don't get to use their immense brain power. How else do you suggest I stimulate her mentally then?

If you see it as demeaning to the dog you're anthropomorphizing because dogs don't feel demeaned or humiliated like humans would


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


Maybe I used the word "need" lightly but it is certainly a great method to stimulate your dog mentally, if the owner and dog find it fun what's the problem?


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

I personally would not want a dog trained to the degree that they are robotic but I know a lot of peopleand their dogs enjoy obedience at the highest level. I prefer to teach Honey things she will enjoy like various challenges with searching and finding things that are hidden or our latest one to get her to fetch the post. Doing these sorts of things gives her all the mental stimulation she needs. 

As she is a P.A.T dog she is not allowed to perform tricks like paw or high 5 as she could easily injure someone. She was taught them by her previous family (its all they did teach her ) and trying to unteach them has been a nightmare. I have to say I do not agree with them being taught, especially by family's with children or elderly relatives who may have leg problems.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Knowing a ridiculous amount of tricks is a side effect of keeping my bright monkey out of mischief, of taking her to innumerable classes so she could build confidence in a controlled environment and of simply having fun together. I would have gone starking raving mad if all we had done was the basics.

There is no way on god's green earth she would do any of it without it being fun to her being a beagle she simply isn't wired that way. Sit stay spin twist etc etc it's all tricks to her.


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

Doing his little batch of 'tricks' is basically guaranteed to get Freddie out of a shy/scared moment and he really comes out of his shell.
Seeing him with a little burst of confidence doesn't seem demeaning to me.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

How many pet Collies do you see herding?

How many Terriers are allowed to rat?

How many Chinese Cresteds do you see on boats?

How many Poodles do you see working behind the gun?

How many Rotties do you see herding the bulls and cows to the butchers?

How many Bulldogs do you see bringing down bulls?

Of course it's to replace the natural instinct, as is agility,obedience, flyball, bikejoring, rigging every dog event we take part in.


----------



## SophieCyde (Oct 24, 2010)

I have to disagree I'm afraid , I love teaching murphy tricks and imo we both get a lot out of it. 

He is a terrier cross so bred for killing small animals which I'm not going to encourage and I feel he needs something to do to stimulate him mentally , he enjoys doing his tricks (for the food and the attention!) and I never force him to do anything he's free to walk away if he pleases.

As long as the dog isn't abused to do something and beaten if it doesn't and is happy to co-operate I don't see the problem?


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

The dog doesn't really know the difference between "sit" etc or a trick. They are all tricks to the dog really - the only purpose the dog assigns to these actions is gaining a reward. He doesn't know that lie down and wait is useful and roll-over is supercilious fun. He just wants his sausage. 

Also my dog licks his own willy in company and licks other dogs' willies at any given opportunity and up until about 4 months ago would frequently wet himself with excitement at meeting people and other dogs. I don't think he has much of a concept of something being "demeaning".


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Honey Bee said:


> As she is a P.A.T dog she is not allowed to perform tricks like paw or high 5 as she could easily injure someone. She was taught them by her previous family (its all they did teach her ) and trying to unteach them has been a nightmare. I have to say I do not agree with them being taught, especially by family's with children or elderly relatives who may have leg problems.


If the command is given a signal, then I don't see why it can't be taught.

Ollie does a very impressive Wave (seen in the video below) 


And I have a signal for that, which is a raised hand with treat in it with the command. Now, he knows when we are doing trick training, and he has never done Wave under any other conditions. We have young children come to the house, and he certainly doesn't paw at them, as my signal from me isn't shown to him nor do I say the command. Dogs don't generalize, so a child putting up a raised hand isn't going to get him to Wave.

And can I just ask, does anyone think Ollie is feeling demeaned and humilated by being asked to do tricks for his human owner, from the evidence of his behaviour from the video?


----------



## Kiwi (Nov 18, 2010)

Interesting debate as I have a puppy and I can understand both sides of the argument. Personally, I would not want Boo to roll-over or sit up and beg but I do want her to learn to basic obedience; tracking; gun-dog skills; basic household tasks etc simply because I want to give her challenges that make her feel that she is earning her way/contributing to the family...Some of my friends say that I shouldn't try any sort of training until she is older  However, she does seem to like games like hide & seek; fetch; tidying toys into her box etc so I do play them with her. She'd get bored otherwise I think and end up chasing the cat :blush:


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2012)

rona said:


> You don't need to teach to interact


But doesnt interaction require engagement from both parties? I dont consider taking a dog to the park to go do his own thing while I chat away on my phone to be much of an interaction. Nor is the dog sleeping on the sofa next to me while I watch tv interacting with me at any meaningful level.

When the dogs and I train though, we are interacting much as two friends who are having a great conversation. We are engaged with each other, we are paying attention to each other. We are communicating and enjoying each others company. It makes me sad that so many folks have not experienced training to be this way....


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

Werehorse said:


> The dog doesn't really know the difference between "sit" etc or a trick. They are all tricks to the dog really - the only purpose the dog assigns to these actions is gaining a reward. He doesn't know that lie down and wait is useful and roll-over is supercilious fun. He just wants his sausage.
> 
> Also my dog licks his own willy in company and licks other dogs' willies at any given opportunity and up until about 4 months ago would frequently wet himself with excitement at meeting people and other dogs. I don't think he has much of a concept of something being "demeaning".


ok the second half of your post actually made me laugh out loud and choke on my tea . thanks for the laugh.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Sled dog hotel said:


> As long as a dog knows the basics, can sit, wait, stayn come, leave and drop
> and down, then really for just a pet dog you dont need anything else or thats what I think personally anyway.


Totally. Was very, very annoyed that the neighbour taught Jakey to give a paw. He forever after wanted to bat you til you held the paw, so tedious!

My lot know what you said, Sled dog hotel. I see no need for them to know more. I don't want robots and I like their characters to be obvious. Zak needs work, I don't deny, but I want him to enjoy his walks, quite simply.


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

A few people have said they wouldn't want their dog to act robotic, I think some might over estimate the level of the "tricks" being trained. It's not like they're being trained to lay differently or do a twirl before approaching people.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Kiwi said:


> Interesting debate as I have a puppy and I can understand both sides of the argument. Personally, I would not want Boo to roll-over or sit up and beg but I do want her to learn to basic obedience; tracking; gun-dog skills; basic household tasks etc simply because I want to give her challenges that make her feel that she is earning her way/contributing to the family...Some of my friends say that I shouldn't try any sort of training until she is older  However, she does seem to like games like hide & seek; fetch; tidying toys into her box etc so I do play them with her. She'd get bored otherwise I think and end up chasing the cat :blush:


IMO the earlier the better with training getting the basics in there early is something I wish I had done especially with the retrieve (and not teaching drop!), however if she was a working gundog in a kennel they wouldn't do much with her till after 6 months, most gundog folk don't.. of course I only made my mind up to do gundog work with Louie last year so I'd done the "damage" already :lol:

I think all dogs need to be given the chance to show what they can do.. whatever breed, age etc.. if they don't take to it - then fair do's, my bitch loves training, but as she is 10 and doesn't think for herself, I don't enjoy it and she is very much stuck in her ways (if paw doesn't work, beg might, if beg doesn't then hide eyes might). My older boy wants to learn but doesn't understand the clicker and after 9 years of just being walked 3 times a day, fed and not really taught anything, it is a difficulty to get him to focus - along with his nervousness and his own stuck in his ways. My youngest however - stick something in front of him and he will come up with something to do with it, he taught himself (with the aid of a clicker) to carry a watering can.. open a pedal bin (his toy box) and fetch me tea towels from a drawer..they're pretty pointless.. but who cares..


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

ouesi said:


> But doesnt interaction require engagement from both parties? I dont consider taking a dog to the park to go do his own thing while I chat away on my phone to be much of an interaction. Nor is the dog sleeping on the sofa next to me while I watch tv interacting with me at any meaningful level.
> 
> When the dogs and I train though, we are interacting much as two friends who are having a great conversation. We are engaged with each other, we are paying attention to each other. We are communicating and enjoying each others company. It makes me sad that so many folks have not experienced training to be this way....


None of my dogs have been taught tricks, Neither have they spent their lives in the park and on the sofa.


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

I honestly don't think they lose any character when trained using positive reward methods. If they aren't being corrected for getting it wrong they are still happy to be themselves. Oscar is well-trained (he's not perfect though! Not by a long chalk) but he still has loads of character and cheekiness. I'd even go as far as to say his character is at its most colourful when he is actually training, as much as when he is enjoying himself on a walk.


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> If the command is given a signal, then I don't see why it can't be taught.
> 
> Ollie does a very impressive Wave (seen in the video below)
> 
> ...


Ollie does a very nice wave but we will have to agree to differ on this one.  I still think that it can cause injuries if the dog waves a paw around and smacks a small child in the face or their claws down an elderly persons legs. People think its cute and they just dont think about the potential consequences. Honey is not allowed to do it now but give paw is the one thing that the people she visits ask her to do. Thankfully she takes no notice.

If you think that Ollie is safe in the way he does this then it is not for me to tell you not to.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Is teaching a dog to dance any more pointless than teaching it to fetch a ball just so you can throw it across the park again?


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

hawksport said:


> Is teaching a dog to dance any more pointless than teaching it to fetch a ball just so you can throw it across the park again?


Or to point out a rabbit for a hawk to get? 

Louie also pressed the button on the bus the other day - "touch" command.. seems pretty pointless - but very handy when I'm lazy.


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

Georgee said:


> Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
> I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
> Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears.
> I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?


I can understand where your coming from, whilst my boys would look at me with bemusment if I were to try and teach them some tricks that other dogs know, other dogs thrive on it. I feel that for the most part it is up to the owners to recognise whether their dog has an aptitude for "tricks". The only "trick" my pair know is the words "find it" which is only ever used when they can't find the ball that I've thrown. This word will keep them busy for up to 10 minutes some days.


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

SLB said:


> Or to point out a rabbit for a hawk to get?
> 
> Louie also pressed the button on the bus the other day - "touch" command.. seems pretty pointless - but very handy when I'm lazy.


I never thought of teaching that one. You've given me an idea


----------



## Kiwi (Nov 18, 2010)

hawksport said:


> Is teaching a dog to dance any more pointless than teaching it to fetch a ball just so you can throw it across the park again?


Fair point Hawksport but the ball is just a training method and I'd rather watch Boo fetching my paper etc than her attempting the tango...(although perversely the idea has rather captured my imagination.....)


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

I have taught Florence sit, stay, lie down, go to bed, leave, drop, shake and wait but none of these are tricks imo. They all serve a purpose. 

For example, Florence's 'wait' is solid and I have got her trained to the point where I can ask her to sit and wait off lead by the side of a footpath while cyclists or walkers pass by. 'Go to bed' is a useful one for when someone comes to the door or when visitors are over. 'Shake' is great for when she is wet, and means I don't have to spend too long drying her off. 'Paw' is about the only 'trick' she knows. 

I haven't really bothered teaching Florence tricks, she's well behaved enough as it is and doesn't really enjoy prolonged sessions. Her greed gets the better of her and she will just revert back to learned 'tricks' to get a treat off me anyway  

So I would agree in some ways; if I tried to force Florence into performing it probably would be a bit demeaning for her. She wouldn't be enjoying herself and would probably find it all a bit tedious. 

However...

I think the dogs who perform heelwork to music etc are the kind of dogs who thrive on that mental stimulation. It is impossible to coerce a dog into these levels of obedience, especially a bored and frustrated dog. I have never once watched an obedience trial like Rally O or Heelwork to Music and found it demeaning. I admire the bond between man and dog and the tremendous concentration on the dog's face. 

Personally I don't see any difference between HTM and Sheepdog Trials really. The dog is simply performing a routine of learned behaviours, whilst being given instruction by his handler/owner in both instances.


----------



## tashax (Jun 25, 2011)

I agree and disagree with everyone :lol: im sure to a dog 'sit' is a trick and what is the difference between teaching your dog to sit and to roll over? Frey loves learning new things, if she didnt love it then i wouldnt do it. Harvey likes to learn but i dont really push him as he doesnt get it most of the time  and kylo is like a sponge at the minute he is picking up his sits and his stays aswell as his pull mums underware off the line trick  On the disagreeing side of things i wouldnt train them to dance or anything like that. IMO flyball is a trick, they run and jump for a reward, the ball. Agility is a trick, the dog does what you tell it to either for a reward or not it is still being taught new things.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Honey Bee said:


> I never thought of teaching that one. You've given me an idea


He also knows how to shut the washing machine door, the dryer door, shut cupboard doors - so much so that when I was drying and putting away pots one day he kept doing this and I was oblivious - I had music on and he kept laying back in his bed after he'd shut them (kitchen is awkward) little bugg*r :lol:

He can touch people, objects and other animals - he knows my sister by name, he can touch the cat, by name, I'm teaching him to "whisper" to Sadie using the touch command..


----------



## Kinjilabs (Apr 15, 2009)

Woody prefers learning fun tricks to serious things, I dont think it does any harm at all, keeps your dog alert, makes life fun thats all a dog wants really is intertaction, they dont know if its for their benefit or not


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

hawksport said:


> Is teaching a dog to dance any more pointless than teaching it to fetch a ball just so you can throw it across the park again?


Tink thinks fetch is hard blooming boring and after the third throw 'frankly if you are dumb enough to throw it after i kindly brought it back twice go get it your blooming self.'

But spend time building and shaping a new trick and she is focussed and motivated, put her infront of an audience, she springs to life, she laps up the attention and plays to the crowd and is so joyful. Seeing her so happy is why i do it especially when even now (17 months after her attack), she is fearful of dogs that approach her to enthusiastically when out and about.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Kiwi said:


> Fair point Hawksport but the ball is just a training method and I'd rather watch Boo fetching my paper etc than her attempting the tango...(although perversely the idea has rather captured my imagination.....)


I don't understand what you mean by saying the ball is just a training method


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2012)

rona said:


> None of my dogs have been taught tricks, Neither have they spent their lives in the park and on the sofa.


If your dog know sit, stay, come, youve taught your dog tricks 



bearcub said:


> I have taught Florence sit, stay, lie down, go to bed, leave, drop, shake and wait but none of these are tricks imo. They all serve a purpose.


What purpose does shake serve?
ALL behaviors put to cue serve a purpose, it may simply be a bridge to another behavior, it may simply be that learning new behaviors builds the dogs confidence, or it may save the dogs life in an emergency.

Heres a useless trick:




Or is it?
I can think of several benefits the dog would gain from this trick. From physical fitness and body awareness to mental stimulation. 
Its really all in how the behaviors are trained.


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

SLB said:


> He also knows how to shut the washing machine door, the dryer door, shut cupboard doors - so much so that when I was drying and putting away pots one day he kept doing this and I was oblivious - I had music on and he kept laying back in his bed after he'd shut them (kitchen is awkward) little bugg*r :lol:
> 
> He can touch people, objects and other animals - he knows my sister by name, he can touch the cat, by name, I'm teaching him to "whisper" to Sadie using the touch command..


Thats really excellent and he obviously enjoys it. I dont see any problem teaching them assistance stuff and it can be really useful. Honey is hopeless with the washing machine though cos its the monster that eats her toys!


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

cinammontoast said:


> Totally. Was very, very annoyed that the neighbour taught Jakey to give a paw. He forever after wanted to bat you til you held the paw, so tedious!
> 
> My lot know what you said, Sled dog hotel. I see no need for them to know more. I don't want robots and I like their characters to be obvious. Zak needs work, I don't deny, but I want him to enjoy his walks, quite simply.


All mine did go to training, and in fact Nanuq went longer then the rest and got to a good level and she was going into advanced class before her seizures started. I still bring all the commands into play in day to day life and Daily walks,
but now I dont do any formal training sessions anymore. Actually "using" the commands in daily life seem enough, these are out every day for sufficient exercise, the dont get bored, and I can honestly say I never have any destruction apart for the very odd nibble on a skirting or door when they were really small pups.
But then also Ive had breeds not known for long repetitive formal training sessions in the main anyway. Perhaps Certain breeds possibly do need it more or else they would drive you doo Lallie.


----------



## Kiwi (Nov 18, 2010)

hawksport said:


> I don't understand what you mean by saying the ball is just a training method


I only mean that if he/she can fetch a ball, the same 'fetch' principle applies to other objects (e.g. the paper) and it has practical applications, whereas dancing can't really be applied to anything 'practical' (not that it matter is the dog is having fun really). Although the idea of Boo doing a tango did make me smile given her current puppy contortions!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

SLB said:


> Or to point out a rabbit for a hawk to get?


Exactly. 
I think you saw my dog do some heelwork and retrieves ect. He's rubbish since he was ill but the reason he went into comp obedience and then started working under hawks was because he needed a job to do, he would never of been happy just learning the basic things


----------



## cravensmum (Jun 28, 2010)

ouesi said:


> What purpose does shake serve?


It's very handy if you have a wet dog,they shake before they get in the car/go into the house.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2012)

cravensmum said:


> It's very handy if you have a wet dog,they shake before they get in the car/go into the house.


Ah! I was thinking shake as in give paw - yes I can see that being beneficial to the human  The dog? Havent met one yet who cares if he can shake off water on command or not


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

Interesting replies
I just dont like the idea of humanising dogs, such as dancing etc and think a lot of what i see as "over training" is just about showing your power over the dog.
Never had need to train my dogs beyond the basics and they are not bored, chasing real rabbits keeps them happy!

Conversation that triggered this post was regarding guide dogs. I have friends who have them. These dogs are at times robotic and trained in every aspect of their lives. Is that a worse life than a fancy dancing collie


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Ah! I was thinking shake as in give paw - yes I can see that being beneficial to the human  The dog? Havent met one yet who cares if he can shake off water on command or not


lol mine relish the oppurtunity to soak any available nearby human , usually me .


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Kiwi said:


> I only mean that if he/she can fetch a ball, the same 'fetch' principle applies to other objects (e.g. the paper) and it has practical applications, whereas dancing can't really be applied to anything 'practical' (not that it matter is the dog is having fun really). Although the idea of Boo doing a tango did make me smile given her current puppy contortions!


Now I get what you are saying. Training to fetch a paper or your slippers ect could be useful but most pet dogs are taught to fetch a ball and never progress onto anything else. I don't care what people teach their dogs as long as dog and owner enjoy it, it's safe and it's taught in a positive way. I do believe though that some dogs need to learn more and exercise their brains more than others. As for making dogs into robots, all I can say is go to a championship obedience competition and instead of watching the dogs compete stand in the next field and watch them being hooligans


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

hawksport said:


> Exactly.
> I think you saw my dog do some heelwork and retrieves ect. He's rubbish since he was ill but the reason he went into comp obedience and then started working under hawks was because he needed a job to do, he would never of been happy just learning the basic things


Your dog looks majestic as do your birds.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2012)

Georgee said:


> Interesting replies
> I just dont like the idea of humanising dogs, such as dancing etc and think a lot of what i see as "over training" is just about showing your power over the dog.
> Never had need to train my dogs beyond the basics and they are not bored, chasing real rabbits keeps them happy!
> 
> Conversation that triggered this post was regarding guide dogs. I have friends who have them. These dogs are at times robotic and trained in every aspect of their lives. Is that a worse life than a fancy dancing collie


Can you explain how you conclude that a fancy dancing collie has a bad life? Or a service dog for that matter?

I do agree that some training seems to be more about overpowering the dog, but teaching and proofing behaviors doesnt HAVE to be like that. 
No one HAS to train their dogs beyond the basics (whatever that is), but many dogs ENJOY training beyond the basics.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Just thought i'd add the practical application to some of the 'fluff' she knows (can you tell it's Tink thats led me into all this nonsense not the other way around!) If she's acting a little nervous when out and about.... I find a nice quiet spot and we do some of her tricks, She loves the interaction, she loves getting praised and a few treats and most importantly she gets a boost of confidence from it and enjoys the rest of the walk a whole lot more.

Edited to add: she is no robot....She celebrated the end of a long stay exercise tonight in class...by cantering around the hall in a victory lap so everyone could admire her... little blooming Diva!


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

i dont think i really understand what is meant by the dog being robotic , can you explain what it is that defines the dog as being robotic ?


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

For me robotic is a dog that is so obedient that it loses the ability to have fun and be a dog. I know of someone who was training for higher level obedience and trained for three hours a day every day. In the house and on walks the dog was so obedient it had forgotten it was a dog. To me that is a robot and not an independant spirit.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Georgee said:


> Interesting replies
> I just dont like the idea of humanising dogs, such as dancing etc and think a lot of what i see as "over training" is just about showing your power over the dog.
> Never had need to train my dogs beyond the basics and they are not bored, chasing real rabbits keeps them happy!
> 
> Conversation that triggered this post was regarding guide dogs. I have friends who have them. These dogs are at times robotic and trained in every aspect of their lives. Is that a worse life than a fancy dancing collie


Dog's intelligence is highly underused. In my experience dogs LOVE having something to do - sure, they will chase rabbits etc and make their own fun if they have nothing else to do, but they love 'working' or doing things and although the tricks you refer to are not something I'm interested in, these dogs are far happier. Given the choice of running around, sniffing, playing with other dogs or 'working' - my dogs will choose 'working' every time.

I don't understand people thinking well trained dogs are robotic If there's one thing I've learnt being involved in gundogs and training it's that dogs are great levellers - no dog, even the best FTCH is robotic - believe me. In my experience, it's people who don't understand and don't own dogs who are really interested in them and prefer to make their own fun that think this.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> it had forgotten it was a dog.


And what does 'being a dog' mean?


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

Honey Bee said:


> For me robotic is a dog that is so obedient that it loses the ability to have fun and be a dog. I know of someone who was training for higher level obedience and trained for three hours a day every day. In the house and on walks the dog was so obedient it had forgotten it was a dog. To me that is a robot and not an independant spirit.


do you think that could be more to do with how it was trained rather than what or how much it was trained ?

im having trouble picturing how having an obedient dog automatically makes it robotic . i dont get how a dog could forget to be a dog . could it be that the lack of fun you saw was to do with the dog being tired from so much training ? .

my dog isnt really naughty but nor is she robotic and she definatly has fun , but no she isnt super trained , she just knows how to behave in certain situations and people do comment on how well behaved she is and usually that comment comes when she is lying down doing nothing.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

rocco33 said:


> *Dog's intelligence is highly underused.* In my experience dogs LOVE having something to do - sure, they will chase rabbits etc and make their own fun if they have nothing else to do, but they love 'working' or doing things and although the tricks you refer to are not something I'm interested in, these dogs are far happier. *Given the choice of running around, sniffing, playing with other dogs or 'working' - my dogs will choose 'working' every time.*
> 
> *I don't understand people thinking well trained dogs are robotic* If there's one thing I've learnt being involved in gundogs and training it's that dogs are great levellers - no dog, even the best FTCH is robotic - believe me. In my experience, it's people who don't understand and don't own dogs who are really interested in them and prefer to make their own fun that think this.


I love this post 
There really is a lot of underestimating of dogs intelligence and abilities it seems. 
A well trained dog is NOT robotic, nor do robotic dogs ever make it to the upper levels of competition.


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> And what does 'being a dog' mean?


I think it is more to do with the dog I have given as an example not being able to relax and enjoy itself. It was always doing what it was told and never did fun things. It even got told to stop sniffing if it tried. For my this is very much the fault of the owners training and pushing things too far. I do not think that particular dog had a happy life and it was a valuable lesson for me to always remember to make my dogs training fun.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> A well trained dog is NOT robotic, nor do robotic dogs ever make it to the upper levels of competition


True - I'm not sure what robotic means, but they ones I see that I would consider are robotic are those that plod behind their owners and sadly, seem quite uninterested in life.


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

Honey Bee said:


> I think it is more to do with the dog I have given as an example not being able to relax and enjoy itself. It was always doing what it was told and never did fun things. It even got told to stop sniffing if it tried. For my this is very much the fault of the owners training and pushing things too far. I do not think that particular dog had a happy life and it was a valuable lesson for me to always remember to make my dogs training fun.


It sounds like there is more of a problem of how/why this dog is being trained rather than what is being trained.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Honey Bee said:


> For me robotic is a dog that is so obedient that it loses the ability to have fun and be a dog. I know of someone who was training for higher level obedience and trained for three hours a day every day. In the house and on walks the dog was so obedient it had forgotten it was a dog. To me that is a robot and not an independant spirit.


Some people could train a dog for 10 minutes a day and it would be too much, others could train it for 3 hours a day and the dog would love every minute of it


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

natty01 said:


> do you think that could be more to do with how it was trained rather than what or how much it was trained ?
> 
> im having trouble picturing how having an obedient dog automatically makes it robotic . i dont get how a dog could forget to be a dog . could it be that the lack of fun you saw was to do with the dog being tired from so much training ? .
> 
> my dog isnt really naughty but nor is she robotic and she definatly has fun , but no she isnt super trained , she just knows how to behave in certain situations and people do comment on how well behaved she is and usually that comment comes when she is lying down doing nothing.


Yes as I said in the previous answer it is definitely to do with the way it was trained. I did not say that an obedient dog is automatically a robot and dogs can be trained to the point of forgetting they are a dog if the owner becomes obsessive about their training and will hardly let them breathe. I do agree with you that the poor was probably physically and mentally exhausted most of the time.


----------



## Honey Bee (Mar 29, 2011)

hawksport said:


> Some people could train a dog for 10 minutes a day and it would be too much, others could train it for 3 hours a day and the dog would love every minute of it


This is true but I am citing a particular example that cause me to think long and hard about the way I have trained my dogs. After all the OP is about training dogs too far and I think this is a perfect demonstatration of this.


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

My black dog is trained to work in the field. She knows how to stop on the whistle, take direction and when put in an area can hunt it up - a robotic dog would be useless in this situation as it wouldn't use its own initiative. 

She also knows how to close the door (useful when the cats leave it open), can differentiate between her left and right paws, can roll over on command and give high fives. She doesn't find any of this demeaning  any more than the fox poo she rolled in yesterday.

Surely if dogs had the comprehension of dignity they'd kick up a fuss at being carried in handbags or wearing booties .

A lot of destructive/problem dogs really need that extra bit of mental stimulation, so easily provided by learning "tricks". Surely everything a dog learns is a trick? Not pulling on a lead, recalling, not using the house as a toilet etc. We humans *need* them to do certain things, but also *like* them to do other extra things - the dog can't differentiate what's termed a trick and what's not; they're all tricks to a dog! 

As for Guide Dogs - they definitely have their downtime! When I was in London, Guide Dogs were trained in our building, but they also had normal playtime in the yard outside. When they're working, yes they may seem robotic but that's because they have a very serious job to do - they are working dogs. When you see a Guide Dog without the jacket on, you'll see a normal, everyday, happy, naughty dog.


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

Honey Bee said:


> Yes as I said in the previous answer it is definitely to do with the way it was trained. I did not say that an obedient dog is automatically a robot and dogs can be trained to the point of forgetting they are a dog if the owner becomes obsessive about their training and will hardly let them breathe. I do agree with you that the poor was probably physically and mentally exhausted most of the time.


yes . the trouble is i think some people automatically equate a dog being quite calm and well mannered with one thats been over trained and lost its spirit . i have actually heard people say that they wont train there dog because its cruel because it will lose its spirit and its character . this is just not true . it is perfectly possible to have an obedient dog which still has character and spirit. in my experience the ones that lack spirit and character are the dogs that havent been properly trained at all but have been subjected to constant bullying and punishment because they have not behaved in the way the owner wanted.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

ouesi said:


> What purpose does shake serve?
> ALL behaviors put to cue serve a purpose, it may simply be a bridge to another behavior, it may simply be that learning new behaviors builds the dogs confidence, or it may save the dogs life in an emergency.


As written in my previous post -



bearcub said:


> 'Shake' is great for when she is wet, and means I don't have to spend too long drying her off.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Honey Bee said:


> This is true but I am citing a particular example that cause me to think long and hard about the way I have trained my dogs. After all the OP is about training dogs too far and I think this is a perfect demonstatration of this.


I'm not trying to be argumentitive, I got that out my system last night so you're safe for a few days now but isn't that an example of how not to train rather than an example of a dog trained to far. I don't think the problem is the distance the dog goes, more its method of travel


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

There is a lot of misunderstanding floating around when it comes to dog training, thats for sure. Precision is not robotic. Responsiveness and reliability does not a robot make. The dog that chooses a rabbit chase is not more of a dog than the one who breaks chase and returns to his owner on cue.

I agree that its not about how much the dog has been trained to do, but how the dog has been trained to do those tasks. I like to think in terms of training is something you do *with* your dog, not *to* your dog. 

And while it is true that ego has no place in dog training, it often ends up firmly planted there anyway. We all have dogs because they bring something to our lives dont we? Because they fulfill a need in us. I see nothing wrong with that as long as both ends of the leash are equally fulfilled.

I remember years ago looking at what it would take to get my compulsion trained dog competition ready, and decided I couldnt do it, the means (harsh techniques) didnt justify the ends (a satin ribbon) in my mind. Now, 15 years later with a different dog and different training methods, I plan on getting as many ribbons and titles on this dog as I can. What drives me? I love the challenge of training the precision needed for the ring, Im competitive, and the dog loves it. The day I show up at a venue and he tells me hes not in to it is the day I quit doing it.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

ouesi said:


> There is a lot of misunderstanding floating around when it comes to dog training, thats for sure. Precision is not robotic. Responsiveness and reliability does not a robot make. The dog that chooses a rabbit chase is not more of a dog than the one who breaks chase and returns to his owner on cue.
> 
> I agree that its not about how much the dog has been trained to do, but how the dog has been trained to do those tasks. I like to think in terms of training is something you do *with* your dog, not *to* your dog.
> 
> ...


Winning a piece of ribbon or a bit of silverware is nice but having a dog that can't wait to get in the ring and work his round with enthusiasm almost bursting out of him is the ultimate reward


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

A dog doesn't know the difference between sit (an essential command in most people's view) and spin (a pointless "demeaning" trick). It doesn't see that running a dog walk is right whereas learning disc dog moves is wrong . All it knows is it's working with it's owner and it's getting a reward. There's nothing wrong with teaching tricks and in some breeds the dogs would be bouncing off the walls and destroying the house without the stimulation that they get from them. Working breeds and even some non-working breeds need that extra stimulation be it agility, obedience, flyball, htm etc it's cruel to deny the dog this. 

Pointless tricks are useless right I got the airline shipping crates for Buster and Leo and they told me to check the fit so I used spin because they had to be able to turn around freely totally useless yep 

There is a difference between over-training a dog to where it barely moves unless the person tells it to because it's so terrified of you but that's more abusive than teaching a dog to beg or do tricks surely


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

rona said:


> I agree with you but many on here think otherwise.
> I think over training can take away the character of the dog in many instances


Curious, how can a dog be "over trained"?



I would be only too pleased if ALL dogs in the world were "over trained", the vast majority are "under trained" and belong to owners who cannot or will not control them adequately.

And give me some examples of how "over training" can "take away the character of a dog".

How many dogs have you met (whose character you knew PRIOR to "over training") have had their characters taken away, and how did this manifest itself?

Because I have met many highly trained dogs and they all without exceptiion have superb characters. In fact it is BECAUSE they have such an individual character that they do so well in HWTM, and say films.

For example what is the "character" of Sykes (on several TV ads and programmes) is he "without character"?


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

I have found this thread very interesting, amusing and, in some cases very revealing.

1 You do not NEED anything other than basic for pet dogs. True, but nobody NEEDS a dog, nobody NEEDS to show, or compete in Obedience, Working Trials, Agility, Sled Dog racing, Cani-X, HWTM, Schutzhund, Rally O etc etc, but WE like it and so do the dogs.

2 Teaching dogs is wasting time. How can ANY time you spend building a relationship with your dog be wasted?

3 If you feel that teaching a dog to roll over or dance is demeaning, simple, you do not have to watch or teach YOUR dogs to do this.

4 Dogs like this are robotic that always makes me hoot with laughter, as nothing could be further from the truth. Ever seen a robotic dog? That accusation is made, IME, by people who cannot or will not train their dogs to be obedient. NO dog at the top of its game (whatever that is) is robotic. How do you know dogs do not enjoy doing (insert relevant trick) believe me, dogs who do not enjoy what they do, do not perform well (just like humans).

I have a PAT dog (retired) and am also a PAT Temperament Assessor and the statement that such dogs are not allowed to perform trick such as paw or do high 5 is ridiculous. You just put them on cue. (Of course not EVERYONE is a skilled trainer and can do this). The two are not mutually exclusive!

5 Dogs which are taught tricks can (gasp, shock, horror) actually ENJOY walks (and swimming, biking, sniffing, cocking their legs etc etc)

6 If your dogs are well behaved it does not mean they would not enjoy further mental stimulation, but if you are a poor trainer and train for TOO long (as in prolonged sessions) and you feed her for doing nothing more advanced than what your originally taught then neither you nor the dog are really material for advanced work are you? 

And NO dog should be FORCED to do something (unless it is for its own welfare). Fortunately, dogs which are at the top of their game be it HWTM are not FORCED to do anything.  Why would you want to do something that makes your dog unhappy or finds tedious (I know I would not). 

7 What is the difference between fun and serious things? 

8 Showing power over your dogs  interesting, so asking your dog to wait and not barge in front of you at doors, not allowing your dog to jump out of the car until you ask it to and have its lead on, requiring it to walk nicely on the lead, is NOT showing your power over your dogs? What is it then? And should you NOT have power over your dogs? I would hope I would ALWAYS have power over my dogs and they would COME when told and not steal food. Why on earth would anyone NOT want to have power over their dogs (although I see plenty of such people every day being dragged down the road). 

And chasing rabbits is of course SO much nicer (especially for the rabbits who of course really enjoy being terrorised).  Very revealing

Again, the top Obedience Champions are FAR from robotic, I know many of them and have seen them roll in muck, swim, etc etc And ALL their training is fun and they know how to be dogs. 

So as in blame the deed not the breed why not blame the poor trainer/training not the sport  next time you see a robotic dog.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

I just can't understand how anyone can think training a dog to do 'tricks' is demeaning. How can an 'essential' command like 'wait' be OK if 'roll over' isn't? Where is the separation to the dog? If a dog enjoys it then where is the problem? If anything I think too few dogs are trained 'tricks' and are left to their own devices to become bored and frustraited, that in my opponion is more demeaning. Dogs were bred to do a job, they love to work (if trained correctly) and to ignore that desire to be given a task and a chance to please their owner is to ignore their nature.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

Kenzie knows quite a few tricks. When I ask her to perform a trick I'm pretty sure she goes 'ooooo food and attention from mum!' rather than 'oh no, this is SO below me, I hope none of my friends see me spinning around'


----------



## Dober (Jan 2, 2012)

My boys love learning new things and I love teaching them new things. I think Metal Dog put it very well in their post. I dont think most people teach their dogs tricks so they can show off or so they can try to dominate their dogs, I think it increases bonds between pet and owner and can also be useful.

Also, who decides whats useful and whats not? For example, I'd say most people dont teach down from a distance and I love this command.

Who each his/her own


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

Wow my last post ended with a question rather than a statement! I did not say training dogs was useless.
I didnt mean the DOG experienced dancing etc as deamining rather i found it all somewhat demeaning. I know dogs have no sense of a "self" concept and that is what distinguishes us and inhibits our behaviour.the dog does not experience things like we do and will not even know it is being demeaned!

I did not conclude guide dogs were robotic. It was a question that i was discussing with friends. The two guide dogs we know do no tricks, but they also have a "flatness" about them, a lack of spirit if you like. They do everythinhg on cue , even poo and we discussed if this was over controlling an animal. I know this is anecdotal and only a small sample. No doubt that there are going to be lots of you who know wild spiritied loopy guide dogs!!
i do not like dancing performing animals. I do not like animals dressed up in silly outfits.I dislike the humanising of dogs. I rather dislike handbag dogs, but hey we are all different.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

ouesi said:


> If your dog know sit, stay, come, you've taught your dog "tricks"


All of those are taught for the safety of the dog, not to entertain humans.
His previous owners taught him how to shake paw  He no longer does that for "fun" it a panic response to what he sees as people teasing him with food  He never uses it with me.
People that he does it too still smile and go awww, what they can't see is the distress that is behind this action


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

cravensmum said:


> It's very handy if you have a wet dog,they shake before they get in the car/go into the house.





ouesi said:


> Ah! I was thinking shake as in give paw - yes I can see that being beneficial to the human  The dog? Havent met one yet who cares if he can shake off water on command or not


It is also useful when in the gundog world for when they return from a water retrieve, you can teach them shake on command so you can get the dummy retrieved to hand, step away and then give the shake command - that way the dog doesn't drop the dummy (which would be a bird if it was working) or shake the life out of it (again if it was a bird it would rip it etc) or forget what it is doing..

Here is Louie doing some of his pointless tricks..











This is the beginning of teaching him to march, I get him used to "left and right" he can do it beside me, but getting it at a heel is a bit of work.. 


This is walking back - I shout at the end because he doesn't stay straight - but he did well :lol: (shouting at myself not the dog)


Benjie "Speak command)


Sadie "beg"


Can't find the cupboard one but will make another to show you


----------



## Milliepoochie (Feb 13, 2011)

Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


I wouldnt say teaching a dog to roll over is demeaning - lol Its hardly the same as teaching a dog to dance or staying up on back legs etc 

And yep lol Millies does know the 'Roll over' command (a a few others) 

I find with Millie she is very eager and keen to learn - Its rewarding working together to learn new things and seeing how excited she is when she gets things right. Its also another form of bonding with her when we spend quality time learning together.

Its like all things though - In moderation.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Personally I can't see how anyone could think it's demeaning; dogs don't have that concept. Is putting a lead on the or having them eat off the floor also demeaning for them. We do alot of things to dogs that may be considered purely for our entertainment or for them to fit in to our lifestyes.

Both my dogs enjoy learning tricks, they enjoy playing games, it helps us intereact with each other & (I feel) improves our relationship. It gives us a chance for some 1-2-1 time together where we both concentrate & can celebrate when we achieve something (well the dogs get a bit of sausage & I get my face licked when they get excited they have done well ) I really can't see how that can be 'wrong' 

There was an interesting programme on BBC last night (Sorry, I can't remember the title) which showed various animals & their learning abilities, I didn't see all so will have to catch up on the iplayer but it was interesting to see that the more they did learn the more they seemed capable of.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

The only issues with teaching dogs tricks are that you eventually CAN run out of things to teach and their tolerance for boredom is lessened.. (I learnt the latter recently)


----------



## Lexiedhb (Jun 9, 2011)

Georgee said:


> Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
> I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
> Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears.
> I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?


NOPE- entertainment for the DOG. Training daft NEW things keeps his brain active. Mental stimulation is just as important as physical IMO.


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

*


Honey Bee said:



Yes as I said in the previous answer it is definitely to do with the way it was trained. I did not say that an obedient dog is automatically a robot and dogs can be trained to the point of forgetting they are a dog if the owner becomes obsessive about their training and will hardly let them breathe. I do agree with you that the poor was probably physically and mentally exhausted most of the time. 

Click to expand...

*It very much depends on the dog. My Twiggy was a top obedience dog and believe me 3 hours training was just scratching the surface. I got tired way before she did. She loved every minute of it - obedience - agiliity - and even the dreadful doggie dancing but she found walks extremely boring.

For anyone to suggest that the top working trials, obedience, agility, HTM and flyball dogs are robotic and that they don't have a normal life is absolute rubbish IMHO as most of them are much loved family pets.
I'm not saying that there aren't exceptions but they are very much in the minority.

At least these dogs are fit both mentally and physically far more so than some of the top show dogs.

Sorry, I don't mean to offend anyone but that's my opinion.


----------



## LexiLou2 (Mar 15, 2011)

As with everything I dont think you can make a blanket statement across all dogs.
Lexi knows all the basics plus paw, other paw, speak, roll over, spin, she can walk in a figure of 8 round my legs, walk in a circle round me dance plus a few others.
Some of these come in handy, for example paw, as when I have to put her creams and sprays on her feet for her allergies I ask for paw and she will let me do whatever I need to do. 
Lexi loves learning new tricks and working out what it is Im asking her to do; she gets really excited and works really hard.
Bosley hates doing trick work, he has no interest, hes rather play games such as find it and work in the field. So I dont force trick work on him, the only thing I have got him doing is paw, as I find it handy for them to be comfortable having their paws handled.
Bos is a much more worker minded and loves to hutn and find things so I play on those strengths.
Lexi hates having to work she has no interest in find it games and would much rather be doing tricks.
Different dogs can enjoy different things, its seeing that in your dog and playing to their own strengths.
I love training my dogs and my dogs love being trained by me.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

SLB said:


> The only issues with teaching dogs tricks are that you eventually CAN run out of things to teach and their tolerance for boredom is lessened.. (I learnt the latter recently)


*grins with mischievously*

You could string things together... and maybe you could put it to music 

sorry couldn't resist


----------



## rottie (Jan 1, 2012)

I have a working dog and without tricks and training he wouldn't have a fulfilled life. His parents and grandparents had working trials and he loves to work, has a great born prey-drive (which is never used to chase live animals...).

I teach him the basic commends, a few more commends that helps us in the house or in interactions with other people. For example "go", he moves away from something or somebody, and this is very useful when we got friends that are afraid of him. I use tricks like high 5 and give paw when children want to interact with him, but are afraid.

Even if dog dancing is not for us, I even teach him a few moves to dance because I use to dance in the living room and he wanted to "play" with me.

And obedience training was very important to build trust and a very good relation. When we put the backpack with the toys and treats he was excited and can hardly wait to start training. Unfortunately we couldn't sign up for the exam because we moved.

One of his brothers is trained as a police dog (his owner is a trainer) and I had the opportunity to meet a few police dogs and their owners and I saw very happy dogs, with jobs and a purposes.

So, for me is *cruel* and *demeaning* to have a working dog sit on the couch all day long with no mental stimulation.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Lets not forget that a lot of these dogs that are working in the various competitions are dogs that have been in rescue after their original owners couldn't cope with them because they didn't channel their mental ability and their need to do something


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

moonviolet said:


> *grins with mischievously*
> 
> You could string things together... and maybe you could put it to music
> 
> sorry couldn't resist


I'm teaching him house work.. 

I did want to teach him the "Panda dance" from The Pacifier movie.. we have a long way to go though :lol: "Cha cha slide" anyone?


----------



## Milliepoochie (Feb 13, 2011)

SLB said:


> I'm teaching him house work..
> 
> I did want to teach him the "Panda dance" from The Pacifier movie.. we have a long way to go though :lol: "Cha cha slide" anyone?


With a duster on each paw and on the tail - Sorted  How have I been missing this opportunity for so long lol


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Go on agility.net and look in the rescue section it's full of dogs that are too intelligent, too drivey for a normal home. When that's channelled into agility they make brilliant competitors. It is cruel to have a dog that needs to work and not do anything with it if that is teaching them tricks or doing htm them it's much better for them than being dumped because they're causing havoc out of boredom. For all htm is "demeaning" it came straight out of obedience and the dogs love it


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

*


SLB said:



I'm teaching him house work.. 

Click to expand...

*


SLB said:


> *I did want to teach him the "Panda dance" from The Pacifier movie.. we have a long way to go though :lol: "Cha cha slide" anyone?*




Seriously you should have a go - its brilliant fun and the dogs love it.

When HTM started in the UK in about 1996 quite a number of obedience handlers decided to have a go and it gave our dogs something different to do over the winter months.

In those days that it was it was, heelwork to music with a few moves thrown in.

These days its split into HTM and freestyle and up to a point I agree with the OP that the freestyle classes are perhaps becoming a bit OTT with far too many props and outlandish costumes. But of course thats just my opinion.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Twiggy said:


> *Seriously you should have a go* - its brilliant fun and the dogs love it.
> 
> When HTM started in the UK in about 1996 quite a number of obedience handlers decided to have a go and it gave our dogs something different to do over the winter months.
> 
> ...


We do, although the steam on the iron upsets him a little and he can never get a straight seam.. rubbish dog! And his pot washing has room for improvement  (joking of course)

The only thing we do have trouble with is formal retrieve/recall and leg weaves - mainly because I'm not too tall and he's not so flexible :lol:


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

What an interesting debate!

Personally, Terence can do tricks, but he only does them on cue. We taught him tricks because he gets easily bored and has to put his brains to use, so he can do paw, other paw, roll over, touch, which one (which hand is the treat in) etc.

He thinks these are games and enjoys them!
In fact, if I take him to the park and do NOTHING, just walk along, Terence makes his own fun and becomes a little menace. Chases birds, pulls, you name it, he does it. So, we do heelwork which involves me running around like a loon and Terence following wagging his little tail. I also ask him to find sticks, which I then throw. Then we go on to the next stick etc. I also hide and ask him to find me. For us, this works extremely well. 
Terence thinks these are all fun activities. If he didn't like it, I wouldn't do it!

And a Staffordshire Bullterrier that gives paw seems to make people think he's not scary somehow.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

I have found this thread very revealing and I'm quite surprised by some posters and their comments.

I think its cruel to under train your dog. The vast majority of dogs today are under trained or not trained at all, and they run riot in parks because their owners have no control. I also do not believe in letting your dog chase wildlife, but that's another thread altogether. 

I'd much rather see obedient dogs in the public, not allowing their dogs to run up to others, not pooing on walks (being taught to poo in their gardens alone), and being able to recall straight away from all distractions. But then maybe that's just a dream. 

Mental stimulation is about teaching tricks and playing games. Mental stimulation actually using more energy than going on a walk, I think a 10-minute session of teaching tricks uses the same energy as an hour walk. Now that speaks volumes for me. Dogs are so intelligent, its sad to not at least try harnessing that.


----------



## Roofs (Feb 2, 2012)

Surely it depends _how_ you train? 
+ve reinforcement, -ve reinforcement etc? A well clicker trained animal WANTS to learn because they get pleasure from it, you have conditioned them that learning and working things out is a good thing.

An animal that is happy to learn new tricks is an animal thats easy to deal with, yes of course a lot of my knowledge is based on having a horse and a horse that isnt always _easy_ to deal with so the more I can teach him to do, the more I can do with him. Now of course if you have an _easy_ horse or dog, you may never need to teach them _tricks_ so they co-operate with you, because they do it anyway! But once you have an animal that doesnt trust people or is just highly strung, then it pays to really reinforce your bond.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I have found this thread very revealing and I'm quite surprised by some posters and their comments.
> 
> I think its cruel to under train your dog. The vast majority of dogs today are under trained or not trained at all, and they run riot in parks because their owners have no control. I also do not believe in letting your dog chase wildlife, but that's another thread altogether.
> 
> ...


I can teach, or probably can teach most things, but I don't think my 10 year old who doesn't have full control over her bladder would be able to learn that one..


----------



## missnaomi (Jun 4, 2010)

rona said:


> You don't need to teach to interact


I mean this in a totally genuine way - and I understand that this might come across as a facetious comment via the internet, and it isn't, it's a normal question...but what do you do to interact with your dog that doesn't involve training?

To interact with ours we go for walks, play games like fetch and "find it" but these both involved an element of training, we sometimes play with toys like tuggy toys and also games where you can hide treats inside. We go to training classes and are learning dog sports (agility - they both love it, and flyball starting last week which Ringo loves but Rosie found it dull, so maybe it's not for her) ... then we spend a lot of time together doing just normal stuff, walking into town and having a coffee - we take them with us etc and at home we do some training and we watch tv together and I cuddle them lots, I brush them and trim their nails and they enjoy resting and chomping on chews. Rosie seems to dislike flyball (too boring) so we're not going to take her and she doesn't really enjoy learning "tricks" so she doesn't have to - but she loves walking and playing fetch and is quite chilled out. Ringo likes doing everything and won't chill out unless he's had a busy day...

If I took out anything which involved learning, we'd go for walks - but not play games, I'd groom them and stroke/fuss them, they'd chew on chews and that's about all I think and I don't see how I'd bond with them really?

This is a genuine question - these are the only dogs I've ever owned, and I was of the opinion that the more we do together (that we both enjoy) the more we'll build a bond together, the more physically and mentally stimulated the dogs will be and the happier we'll all be. What things do other people do to interact with their dogs that don't involve training?

Naomi


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

I also found, when the dogs have been injured & unable to go for walks that their enthusiasm for learning new tricks/commands/games is great to stop them becoming bored.

When Roxy injured her paw, teaching her to give her paw made it easier to clean & her pad when she had cut it badly, teaching them both to crawl came in useful for getting under a style when out on a walk, & probably a few more that I can't think off at the moment!


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

hawksport said:


> Lets not forget that a lot of these dogs that are working in the various competitions are dogs that have been in rescue after their original owners couldn't cope with them because they didn't channel their mental ability and their need to do something


This is exactly why we have our black muttdog. He was making a major nuisance of himself in his first rescue home. We got him and soon realized his NEED for mental stimulation. Started training obedience tricks to keep our sanity 



Georgee said:


> Wow my last post ended with a question rather than a statement! I did not say training dogs was useless.
> I didnt mean the DOG experienced dancing etc as deamining rather i found it all somewhat demeaning. I know dogs have no sense of a "self" concept and that is what distinguishes us and inhibits our behaviour.the dog does not experience things like we do and will not even know it is being demeaned!


Look at the huge variety in dog breeds, from the tiny chihuahua to the great dane to everything in between. People have different preferences for what they want in a dog, so it stands to reason that we will also have different preferences in what we train our dogs to do. What is demeaning in your eyes is bonding and meaningful time spent together in someone elses eyes.



Georgee said:


> I did not conclude guide dogs were robotic. It was a question that i was discussing with friends. The two guide dogs we know do no tricks, but they also have a "flatness" about them, a lack of spirit if you like. They do everythinhg on cue , even poo and we discussed if this was over controlling an animal.


Dogs cant poo on command, they have to actually need to poo to begin with  That said though, I love having a go pee cue! When we take a long drive with the dogs, its great to be able to stop at a rest-stop and have the dog pee so hes not sitting uncomfortable in the car needing to go b/c he didnt at the last stop. I dont find it a control thing, rather another way of communicating with my dog, hey, pee now b/c were not stopping again for another several hours. To me its about communication, not control.

And again, everything a guide dog learns IS tricks. I am convinced dogs dont distinguish between wait at the curb and rollover. This is one of the arguments anti-clicker training folks use, that clicker training is fine for tricks, but that real world training requires other methods. This argument annoys me to no end because its used to excuse harsh training for important things, another the ends justify the means argument, and I simply find it to be a cop-out.



rona said:


> All of those are taught for the safety of the dog, not to entertain humans.
> His previous owners taught him how to shake paw  He no longer does that for "fun" it a panic response to what he sees as people teasing him with food  He never uses it with me.
> People that he does it too still smile and go awww, what they can't see is the distress that is behind this action


This is not a result of the trick trained, but HOW the trick was trained. I would be just as upset to see a dog have a panic response to being told down, and sadly, many do. Not because down is a bad thing to teach your dog, but because of how it is taught.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

missnaomi said:


> I mean this in a totally genuine way - and I understand that this might come across as a facetious comment via the internet, and it isn't, it's a normal question...but what do you do to interact with your dog that doesn't involve training?
> 
> To interact with ours we go for walks, play games like fetch and "find it" but these both involved an element of training, we sometimes play with toys like tuggy toys and also games where you can hide treats inside. We go to training classes and are learning dog sports (agility - they both love it, and flyball starting last week which Ringo loves but Rosie found it dull, so maybe it's not for her) ... then we spend a lot of time together doing just normal stuff, walking into town and having a coffee - we take them with us etc and at home we do some training and we watch tv together and I cuddle them lots, I brush them and trim their nails and they enjoy resting and chomping on chews. Rosie seems to dislike flyball (too boring) so we're not going to take her and she doesn't really enjoy learning "tricks" so she doesn't have to - but she loves walking and playing fetch and is quite chilled out. Ringo likes doing everything and won't chill out unless he's had a busy day...
> 
> ...


This was a question about over training and I have seen many a dog that has had it's whole being squashed by over zealous people and their training.
Yes my dog and I do all the normal things but tricks for tricks sake bore him, and me .
I do think that many who have only ever had Collies would never understand anything else. Collies are wired to do tricks, they just love the repetitive nature of them. Nothing wrong with that. 
My OH didn't understand what I'm saying because he had only ever had experience of Collies, since getting a retriever he now agrees.
I cannot explain this in a few words and am not in the frame of mind to be insulted and belittled by people (not you ) that think training is a science with facts!! It's not it's a matter of opinion and mine is that many dogs are fundamentally changed by over "training"


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

ouesi said:


> This is not a result of the trick trained, but HOW the trick was trained. I would be just as upset to see a dog have a panic response to being told down, and sadly, many do. Not because down is a bad thing to teach your dog, but because of how it is taught.


Wrong 
How the hell can you make judgments on my dog without seeing him?
Are you THAT brilliant?


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

rona said:


> Yes my dog and I do all the normal things but tricks for tricks sake bore him, and me .


that may be the case for you and your dog (who am I to argue with that?). However some dogs (in fact I'd say many dogs) would and do thrive with advanced training or trick training. Its bonding and interaction with their owners which they crave.


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

I've just been thinking about this "overtraining". Some people have mentioned assistance dogs and I have been wondering, do you think they look "robotic" because of the life that they lead? They can't be exuberant, lively etc because they would put their owner at risk?

Could that be why people think they look a bit, well, devoid of spirit?
Just a thought.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> that may be the case for you and your dog (who am I to argue with that?). However some dogs (in fact I'd say many dogs) would and do thrive with advanced training or trick training. Its bonding and interaction with their owners which they crave.


I haven't ever denied this 
I also know dogs that thrive on training/tricks 
There is another side though, not that the trainers would ever admit it


----------



## Jugsmalone (Apr 11, 2011)

I have nothing against trick training at all, however, I have a problem with it if it is for human entertainment. I agree it is good for the dog, as it gives the dog something to do and stimulate his/her mind.

I suppose I have taught my dogs tricks such as giving paws and rolling over and playing dead.


----------



## missnaomi (Jun 4, 2010)

rona said:


> This was a question about over training and I have seen many a dog that has had it's whole being squashed by over zealous people and their training.
> Yes my dog and I do all the normal things but tricks for tricks sake bore him, and me .
> I do think that many who have only ever had Collies would never understand anything else. Collies are wired to do tricks, they just love the repetitive nature of them. Nothing wrong with that.
> My OH didn't understand what I'm saying because he had only ever had experience of Collies, since getting a retriever he now agrees.
> I cannot explain this in a few words and am not in the frame of mind to be insulted and belittled by people (not you ) that think training is a science with facts!! It's not it's a matter of opinion and mine is that many dogs are fundamentally changed by over "training"


Ah, that makes sense now - thank you 
Naomi


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Surely to the dog performing ANY behaviour on cue is just a trick? Why would the dog see "roll over" as more demeaning than "sit" or "come to me when I call you"? 

I enjoy training my new dog and he gives every indication that he enjoys the sessions, if he didn't then I'd teach the basics and nothing more. As long as he's enthusiastic about learning then I'll continue to teach him, even if it is only "pointless tricks". Rupert loved his clicker training sessions and would have carried on long after I ended the session. Wolf disliked training, he knew the basics and nothing more.

Me and my hubby were discussing the other night though whether some people stamp out a dogs spirit in the name of having a well behaved dog. We know a few dogs who are perfectly well behaved, do everything that's asked of them and never put a foot wrong. Yet the dogs are somehow lifeless and dull and they don't appear to be happy. Rupert and Shadow were anything but flat and spiritless despite knowing a hell of a lot of tricks. Maybe it's in the way they're trained. Or the owners attitude to letting them be dogs. My friends dog has had very little training yet is as dull as you can get, probably because she's expected to lie around and be quiet all the time.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


I have not read all the replies but I strongly disagree with this. The dog is not dancing anyway, it is called heelwork to music and the owner is putting together various things the dog has been taught so that it looks good with the music that is chosen to go with the routine. No way does the dog 'dance'.



terencesmum said:


> I've just been thinking about this "overtraining". Some people have mentioned assistance dogs and I have been wondering, do you think they look "robotic" because of the life that they lead? They can't be exuberant, lively etc because they would put their owner at risk?
> 
> Could that be why people think they look a bit, well, devoid of spirit?
> Just a thought.


Assistance dogs can be exuberant and lively. They do not look robotic, they are fulfilled, they are working and busy, not bored like the average pet dog.
My sister has a guide dog - I can assure you it is not a robot, it has to be handled and it runs and plays as the track she made round my garden will bear out!
Any dog that is well trained and busy and fulfilled will look the same when it is working.
Their training is just as fun as pet dog training - but they know when they are working.

Obedience dogs are normal happy dogs but when they are working they have to concentrate 100 percent so obviously they are not flying around the place out of control! All working dogs know the difference between working and playing or relaxing.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

> rona said:
> 
> 
> > All of those are taught for the safety of the dog, not to entertain humans.
> ...


Whoa there! Its not a judgement call, Im simply commenting based on the information you gave! 
How do you know exactly how the trick was trained either? Unless you were there when the previous owners taught it?

Incorrect treat training can cause issues and stressful responses just as harsher methods can.

Your words are that the dog has a panic response to what he perceives as being teased with treats. Does that not sound like faulty training to you? It does to me!

There is no teasing in correct, effective positive reinforcement training. There is a difference between a bribe, a lure, and a reward, and people who train with food properly understand that. Whoever trained your dog to give paw, must not have or the dog wouldnt respond that way. I dont mean that judgementally, Im simply making a statement of what I know to be true of training with rewards.

I dont have to be brilliant to deduce that the dog was likely over-lured and bribed to learn that trick, which will cause many dogs to be anxious or even shut down and learn to dislike being offered food.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Blitz said:


> Assistance dogs can be exuberant and lively. They do not look robotic, they are fulfilled, they are working and busy, not bored like the average pet dog.
> My sister has a guide dog - I can assure you it is not a robot, it has to be handled and it runs and plays as the track she made round my garden will bear out!
> Any dog that is well trained and busy and fulfilled will look the same when it is working.
> Their training is just as fun as pet dog training - but they know when they are working.


Having known 2 guide dogs, one a Lab, the other a Boxer, I would agree with that. Both dogs were highly focused on their job when they were on duty, they ignored distractions, didn't play and were calm and steady and appeared quite boring I suppose. Off duty however was another matter. They ran and played just like any other dog, they had their quirks just like any other dog too.


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

I need to get a video of Oscar doing some of his training. He comes alive when he's "working", he really does. The more he's having to think and engage brain the more he sparkles. 

It's very much about communication for me, rather than control, and we have so much fun with it all. (yet he'll still do a bunk and a circuit of the room saying hello to everyone in a relaxed moment - cos he's still a cheeky little sod. )


----------



## kat&molly (Mar 2, 2011)

Each to their own but we dont do tricks.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Here is Louie's best trick, he has a dodgy ear atm - hence why he shakes at the beginning and he hasn't done this for a while and the dryer is on - hence his not so happy face.. I'd watch it with the sound off - our dryer is pretty noisy. I can't find the original video I did of this, but it was better..


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

rona said:


> This was a question about over training and I have seen many a dog that has had it's whole being squashed by over zealous people and their training.
> Yes my dog and I do all the normal things but tricks for tricks sake bore him, and me .
> I do think that many who have only ever had Collies would never understand anything else. Collies are wired to do tricks, they just love the repetitive nature of them. Nothing wrong with that.
> My OH didn't understand what I'm saying because he had only ever had experience of Collies, since getting a retriever he now agrees.
> I cannot explain this in a few words and am not in the frame of mind to be insulted and belittled by people (not you ) that think training is a science with facts!! It's not it's a matter of opinion and mine is that many dogs are fundamentally changed by over "training"


Really?  My youngest retriever wouldn't be worth living with if she didn't have a job to do - she's a flipping 'mare!!

A very experienced dog-man once said to me in relation to brain training that "a tired dog's a happy dog" - it couldn't be more true. Could it not be that the "flat" dogs people think are 'overtrained' are simply just tired and satisfied?

We "train" children to be better members of society (can you imagine a 14 year old acting like a 3 year old? Ok, there are a few...), and they are constantly being trained - when does a child become overtrained? They are fundamentally changed so they become acceptable adults. Surely this has to be the same with dogs?

As others have said, there are methods of training that will change the dog...but these aren't good methods and these owners aren't trainers. I hate seeing dogs that are hand-shy, flinching at their owners, afraid to move 3 feet - these dogs aren't over trained, they are BADLY trained. There's a huge difference.

Highly trained dogs actually end up enjoying greater freedoms, thereby able to exhibit more canine behaviours. Living and interacting together in a partnership - isn't this what owning a dog should be about?


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Brief footnote: post above wasn't aimed at anyone in particular nor was it intended to offend!


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

It`s all tricks! Once you get beyond recall that is. 
My dogs love to learn. Daisy`s done agility, Working Trials, HTM, Obedience, tracking etc. She loves to use her brain and her body and her amazing senses. 
I think if you`ve got a dog that loves to learn, you should encourage it.


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

I wouldn't say my collies are overtrained but we do teach them tricks.

Scout knows to twirl, give paw, wave etc, he also knows lots of his toys by name.

I can't see how it has taken away from his character, he loves training time. He also loves going to obedience and agility. We do some agility work with him at home and he goes absolutely nutty when he sees me going into the shed where we keep his weaves/jumps. Some dogs like to have a job to do, it's just a different form of mental stimulation.

I've never felt like I'm forcing him into doing something that makes him feel uncomfortable, I know him well enough to know that he's having a good time.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 22, 2010)

One of my dogs is happy to have learnt the sit, stay, down routine including get off the sofa, lets go for a walk, give me a kiss and much more but the other dog, being a collie, needs the stimulation to learn more. We do beginners agility with her so she is learning various commands and she cant get enough of it simply because she is rewarded with her ball at the end of it. I do take your point about some tricks making you feel uncomfortable but I have never seen a dog do these tricks without looking as though they are loving every minute of being able to do them. If it doesnt do any harm good luck to them.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Whoa there! Its not a judgement call, I'm simply commenting based on the information you gave!
> How do you know exactly how the trick was trained either? Unless you were there when the previous owners taught it?
> 
> Incorrect treat training can cause issues and stressful responses just as harsher methods can.
> ...


Oh for goodness sake I give up


----------



## vickieb (Nov 22, 2010)

I taught 'Paw' as a sort of trick..... but then realise thats its very useful command for wiping dirt and snow off his feet


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

vickieb said:


> I taught 'Paw' as a sort of trick..... but then realise thats its very useful command for wiping dirt and snow off his feet


And for nail trimming.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

shamykebab said:


> Really?  My youngest retriever wouldn't be worth living with if she didn't have a job to do - she's a flipping 'mare!!
> 
> A very experienced dog-man once said to me in relation to brain training that "a tired dog's a happy dog" - it couldn't be more true. Could it not be that the "flat" dogs people think are 'overtrained' are simply just tired and satisfied?
> 
> ...


If you want to compare it to children.
Compare it to school, The child is put under huge pressure to "perform", perfectly fine for those with academic skils, but what of the others? They are put under immeasurable stress to achieve what either alludes them or bores them.
Odd that it is now being recognized that not all children are capable of achieving academically and more practical skills are being made availiable to them.

Think about this in reference to the subject here


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

vickieb said:


> I taught 'Paw' as a sort of trick..... but then realise thats its very useful command for wiping dirt and snow off his feet


Mine doesn't need that to get his paws checked out


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

rona said:


> If you want to compare it to children.
> Compare it to school, The child is put under huge pressure to "perform", perfectly fine for those with academic skils, but what of the others? They are put under immeasurable stress to achieve what either alludes them or bores them.
> Odd that it is now being recognized that not all children are capable of achieving academically and more practical skills are being made availiable to them.
> 
> Think about this in reference to the subject here


Now I get what you are saying. ( sorry was a bit slow on the uptake before) I wouldn't take Tink to flyball, she has no interest in balls whatsoever. All the activities we do are because she enjoys them and the minute she stops 'lighting up' I'll stop make a damn fool of myself and have a nice quiet sunday morning walk.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

rona said:


> If you want to compare it to children.
> Compare it to school, The child is put under huge pressure to "perform", perfectly fine for those with academic skils, but what of the others? They are put under immeasurable stress to achieve what either *alludes *them or bores them.
> Odd that it is now being recognized that not all children are capable of achieving academically and more practical skills are being made availiable to them.
> 
> Think about this in reference to the subject here


Yes your post is a good example of this.

I think the word you are searching for is ELUDE; allude means something else entirely! 

You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but that is not what we are talking about here. 

Dogs which are under stress demonstrate it, do not perform well and owners will be informed that the dog they have at the end of the lead is not what they THOUGHT they had and/or they do not have the suitable skills, knowledge, ability, training or experience to adequately develop these in their dogs. 

We are not talking about dogs which are FORCED to do things though are we.


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

rona said:


> If you want to compare it to children.
> Compare it to school, The child is put under huge pressure to "perform", perfectly fine for those with academic skils, but what of the others? They are put under immeasurable stress to achieve what either alludes them or bores them.
> Odd that it is now being recognized that not all children are capable of achieving academically and more practical skills are being made availiable to them.
> 
> Think about this in reference to the subject here


Exactly!  Not every child is stimulated or learns in the same way, so methods and teaching is changing. Same with dogs. Some don't need treats, others prefer simple verbal praise, and there are dogs that would kill for a game of tuggy with their favourite toy. The most important thing to realise that even though teaching is changing in schools and other practical skills are being valued, at the end of the day the child is still being "trained".

Different dogs will get to different levels by means that suit them and their owners. Nothing is being taken away from the dog, they are living more fulfilled lives.


----------



## Superash (Aug 23, 2011)

I dont train my dogs to do tricks but they do think that all important paw is the be all and end all to get what ever they want they know sit wait nooo etc but i really do watching trained dogs doing tricks and if they weren't happy and being bulied into it they wouldnt do it would they ? Its all down to the dogs opinion


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

I do agree about the difffernt styles/ways of learning. The programme I watched last night (Super Smart Animals) had a section at the end regarding animals using their imagination which was really interesting. We used to do something similar with the dogs in training classes. 

In some sessions we would get a box & see what the dog would do with this to ear a treat. Toby loved this game & would get in to the box, push it around, flip it over - he seemed to enjoy doing different things with this & would try lots of new things to gain rewards

Roxy though didn't like this game. She much seemed to prefer being told what to do with the box. If not given any instruction she would just walk away or sit down & go to sleep & did not appear to get any enjoyment from the activity.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> Yes your post is a good example of this.
> 
> I think the word you are searching for is ELUDE; allude means something else entirely!
> 
> ...


But so many do not recognize the stress, after all what harm can a few tricks do? 

Thank you for the correction


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Rupert loved the 101 things to do with a box game  He loved any training though, his eyes would light up if I picked the clicker up and he'd do a little dance. 

Not all dogs may enjoy learning a load of new things but some dogs genuinely do enjoy training and going through their tricks. Why should those dogs not be taught simply because other dogs don't enjoy it? I'm not sure what Spencer is going to enjoy yet, he comes running if he hears me pick up the clicker but so far all he's learned are sit and to target my hand with his nose for a second. If he enjoys clicker sessions they'll continue well beyond the basics, if not then I'll teach what he needs to know and that will be it.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> Rupert loved the 101 things to do with a box game


Someone gave me that, it just stressed Alfie. He is a bit dim mind 
He'd rather go people watching. He seems to think they are all completely mad, running around like they do, doing things that aren't important or fun :lol:


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

rona said:


> Someone gave me that, it just stressed Alfie. He is a bit dim mind
> He'd rather go people watching. He seems to think they are all completely mad, running around like they do, doing things that aren't important or fun :lol:


It stressed Rupert at first, he didn't "get" it. Someone had told me to start off clicker training that way. Seeing that it stressed him out though I ditched it and taught him a few other things first. We went back to 101 things to do with a box (only I used a plastic kids chair) about a year later and he really got into it. He got very creative with it, crawling part way under it then standing up so it was on his back, tipping it over in various ways, putting toys on it etc. Lots of fun to watch and judging by his big grin lots of fun for him too.

I guess it just depends on your individual dog. Rupert found things like sit, down, stay etc deadly boring. Things like close the door, switch the light on, push the chair over etc on the other hand he loved to do. I think because they involved running around or jumping up or something else he found fun.


----------



## TabithaJ (Apr 18, 2010)

I think it really depends on the dog. Some dogs enjoy the stimulation of constantly learning new things and as long as the games/tricks/commands are physically safe, and enjoyable for them, then I cannot see any harm in this.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> It stressed Rupert at first, he didn't "get" it. Someone had told me to start off clicker training that way. Seeing that it stressed him out though I ditched it and taught him a few other things first. We went back to 101 things to do with a box (only I used a plastic kids chair) about a year later and he really got into it. He got very creative with it, crawling part way under it then standing up so it was on his back, tipping it over in various ways, putting toys on it etc. Lots of fun to watch and judging by his big grin lots of fun for him too.
> 
> I guess it just depends on your individual dog. Rupert found things like sit, down, stay etc deadly boring. Things like close the door, switch the light on, push the chair over etc on the other hand he loved to do. I think because they involved running around or jumping up or something else he found fun.


Muddy did enjoy it but he gets soooo exuberant and excited we have to be careful to keep a lid on him, he's just too big to go storming around


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

rona said:


> Muddy did enjoy it but he gets soooo exuberant and excited we have to be careful to keep a lid on him, he's just too big to go storming around


Yeah, that's a problem I had with Rupert. He'd get too enthusiastic sometimes. I tended to keep sessions very short when working on something he found really exciting, otherwise I'd end up getting hurt or something would get broken.


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

Each to their own, I love it and enjoy it sadly Maya has no intrest in tricks which is the reason my next dog will be a springer like my last trick dog, Barney who done more for me that any other person or animal has.

I found teaching tricks is fun and if both are having fun what's the harm. 

I loved showing Barney's tricks off, everyone used to stop and ask us to do some or would tell other people about how amazing my dog was and everyone knew him because of his tricks.

I had a social phobia and for me this was the best way of getting around it and stop myself having panic attacks because people would focus on my dog and what he done, I would never get negative feedback and Barney always enjoyed himself.

Now Maya is a different dog, she would be a dog who deems tricks pointless and stupid so, I never bother with her anymore.

If the dog is happy then I don't see the problem, can't obedience training go too far when the dog can never have fun and has to follow the various commands on the order no games no playing just work. 

Trick training is fun when both human and dog can bond together because sometimes maybe dogs just want to please us to.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

The title to this thread is "training dogs too far", so are we just discussing tricks, or are we encompassing everything which goes beyond the basics of what we need the dog to know?

My dogs know a few tricks, i'm not massively into teaching things like that, but what they have been taught goes way beyond what I require.

All 3 are pet dogs but between them are well trained in agility, obedience and gundog work, to the point where we compete/could compete, so is this kind of training seen as going too far?

I think for people wishing to own breeds which still retain drive, enthusiasm and plenty of intelligence but are not going to allow the dog to fulfill their original role, then 'trick training' (I use the term loosely) is a very good alternative.


----------



## Sled dog hotel (Aug 11, 2010)

rona said:


> This was a question about over training and I have seen many a dog that has had it's whole being squashed by over zealous people and their training.
> Yes my dog and I do all the normal things but tricks for tricks sake bore him, and me .
> I do think that many who have only ever had Collies would never understand anything else. Collies are wired to do tricks, they just love the repetitive nature of them. Nothing wrong with that.
> My OH didn't understand what I'm saying because he had only ever had experience of Collies, since getting a retriever he now agrees.
> I cannot explain this in a few words and am not in the frame of mind to be insulted and belittled by people (not you ) that think training is a science with facts!! It's not it's a matter of opinion and mine is that many dogs are fundamentally changed by over "training"


 I agree that if a dog really enjoys ongoing, and higher and higher levels of advanced training, then it is fine, and I also agree certain breeds in particular really revel in and enjoy and excel at it too. I have also seen the other side of the coin and its not always pretty.

I have seen owners at training and the looks on their faces and body language at the distaste when a dog gets something wrong. One person at one of the classes who did have collies who reached high standards was sometimes to the point of being fanatical. Especially on one occasion with a younger novice dog.

The dog was obviously having an off day, usually pretty perfect, and the guy you could see was getting more and more tense, when on this day it wouldnt comply. He actually at one point took the dog outside and bellowed at it "what is wrong with you today" etc etc. I felt sorry for the dog because in true collie fashion he was eager to please, and usually the dog was perfection especially for a younger dog.

So I would say as long as the dog enjoys it and so does the owner and its treated as fun, then fine. There are trainers though and owners of dogs where I really do believe that its for them, more then it is for the poor dogs,
and its all about what they can achieve and what glory they personally get.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

Jugsmalone said:


> I have nothing against trick training at all, however, I have a problem with it if it is for human entertainment.


In many ways though, dogs themselves are a human creation for human entertainment/work functions. We have refined and bred dogs for every conceivable task out there, from warming laps to dragging heavy fishing nets in frigid water. Its really ALL for human entertainment isn't it?

So to me I look at what the dog is getting out of it too. Is the other end of the leash getting equally fulfilled by the "job". That's my litmus test. 
I refuse to teach a formal retrieve with an ear pinch, but I am putting a lot of time and work in to it with motivational methods, and the dog is loving it. To the point that he is now bringing me things without being asked (yes, yes, I know, stimulus control and all that ). So while the dumbbell retrieve is nothing but a "trick" for *my* entertainment, it is still very enjoyable for the dog.



kat&molly said:


> Each to their own but we dont do tricks.





ClaireandDaisy said:


> It`s all tricks! Once you get beyond recall that is.


I too would argue that its ALL tricks  "Sit" is a trick. "Come" is a trick. I have never seen two dogs interacting asking for behaviors on cue. They don't care, we do. 
And what we care about is going to differ. People with tiny dogs may not be as worried about their dog sitting for a small child to pet them. Me and my danes? A "sit" and "down" is hugely important.



shamykebab said:


> As others have said, there are methods of training that will change the dog...but these aren't good methods and these owners aren't trainers. I hate seeing dogs that are hand-shy, flinching at their owners, afraid to move 3 feet - these dogs aren't over trained, they are BADLY trained. There's a huge difference.
> 
> Highly trained dogs actually end up enjoying greater freedoms, thereby able to exhibit more canine behaviours. Living and interacting together in a partnership - isn't this what owning a dog should be about?


Loved the whole post, but the above especially. If the dog hates trick training, then you're going about it wrong IMO. If you're dog's favorite part of training is when its over, then you are doing something very, very wrong.

By the same token though, every interaction with your dog is "training". Just because we don't feel like we're training doesn't mean the dog isn't learning  So every time the dog does X and we react with Y, there is learning happening, whether we mean for it to be happening or not 



rona said:


> Oh for goodness sake I give up


It seems I have offended you somehow, and I'm sorry for that. None of my posts are meant in a personal way. I would like to have a dialogue though, can you please explain what it is you feel I'm not understanding?


rona said:


> If you want to compare it to children.
> Compare it to school, The child is put under huge pressure to "perform", perfectly fine for those with academic skils, but what of the others? They are put under immeasurable stress to achieve what either alludes them or bores them.
> Odd that it is now being recognized that not all children are capable of achieving academically and more practical skills are being made availiable to them.
> 
> Think about this in reference to the subject here


Oh I love the analogy as I am a teacher by profession  However I disagree that putting a child under stress is necessary for learning. No significant learning happens under stress in ANY species.
I guess the way I see it, to me its about making the lesson meaningful and enjoyable to the student, and then, no matter what you're teaching, the student will learn. Of course, different dogs (and children) are more suited to different tasks, but that doesn't mean you couldn't teach a bloodhound to herd and have fun doing it. He would not be very good at it, no, but you absolutely *can* teach the dog the necessary behaviors and to enjoy doing those behaviors.



Cleo38 said:


> In some sessions we would get a box & see what the dog would do with this to ear a treat. Toby loved this game & would get in to the box, push it around, flip it over - he seemed to enjoy doing different things with this & would try lots of new things to gain rewards
> 
> Roxy though didn't like this game. She much seemed to *prefer being told what to do* with the box. If not given any instruction she would just walk away or sit down & go to sleep & did not appear to get any enjoyment from the activity.


I think this is very typical of some dogs - I *love* Jane Killion's book "When pigs fly" to teach a dog to enjoy figuring things out and enjoy the process of learning. For those who's dogs' don't get in to "box games" I hugely recommend it


----------



## 5rivers79 (Mar 28, 2011)

Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


Cant believe im gonna say this..but i agree.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

ouesi said:


> In many ways though, dogs themselves are a human creation for human entertainment/work functions. We have refined and bred dogs for every conceivable task out there, from warming laps to dragging heavy fishing nets in frigid water. Its really ALL for human entertainment isn't it?
> 
> So to me I look at what the dog is getting out of it too. Is the other end of the leash getting equally fulfilled by the "job". That's my litmus test.
> I refuse to teach a formal retrieve with an ear pinch, but I am putting a lot of time and work in to it with motivational methods, and the dog is loving it. To the point that he is now bringing me things without being asked (yes, yes, I know, stimulus control and all that ). So while the dumbbell retrieve is nothing but a "trick" for *my* entertainment, it is still very enjoyable for the dog.
> ...


Would rep you for this but I must spread it around apparently!!!

I have recently bought some Nina Ottossen toys (as I found some at really good prices) which have helped with Roxy be more inventive so maybe we can build on that.

Will look up the book you suggested though ... just to add to my ever expaning collection of 'dog' books!!


----------



## lucylastic (Apr 9, 2011)

"horses for courses" I have seen this from both sides. I had a dog who was perfectly well behaved and trained to what I consider to be an acceptable level. He walked reasonably well on lead, came when called, greeted people nicely, etc. I took him to agility twice. He wasn't interested. I really never did any further training with him. He enjoyed going out on walks and playing either with me or other dogs. That was enough for him He was fulfilled and happy. He was the dog for whom 10 minutes training daily was too much. The dog I have now is the complete opposite. 3 hours a day is not enough. She loves training and loves learning. She works on a shoot in winter and she does agility in summer. If she did not enjoy either of these activities, I wouldn't do them. I could probably train her for HTM but that really is not my cup of tea. I don't like to watch it but I don't deny that the dogs seem to enjoy it.


----------



## redroses2106 (Aug 21, 2011)

Georgee said:


> Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
> I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
> Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears.
> I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?


i havent read alllll the replys, i would be here all day lol

sophie knows the basics you mentioned she also knows paws up (beg) the reason its paws up is she kept going to her bed on the beg command and high 5 and ofc the usual paw, other paw, lie down, sit, off

she enjoys learning them and doing them because it means treeeeat time! it helps us bond, she is in no way a circus bear! she will often do these tricks without being asked when she sees me going to her treat box, if she really didnt want to do them surely she wouldnt automatically do it, she often get a chew bar and is only asked to sit but she chooses to put the paws up 
i wouldnt say shes doing it for my entertainment but i did enjoy teaching her and i loooved showing people what she had learnt, I also like when we can greet each other with a high 5 lol :blush:

do you not think that them knowing fetch, bed, stay and leave it are all in there own way tricks too? they are all taught by humans a dogs natural instinct would not be to LEAVE and go to a certain place for BED, dogs have been bred for humans, to work for humans, as a companioin for humans and I think they enjoy learning new things, they need to know some commands in order to work in a household.

I feel no guilt for any of the tricks I have taught my dog, I dont feel im using her like a dancing bear, she is treated with nothing but love, respect and kindness, i have tried the roll over trick with her, and she did not look like she was enjoying it she would get up and walk away so i dont try that one anymore, if ever she looked uncomfortable with a trick then it would stop straight away, they are as much for her to enjoy learning as they are for me teaching


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

lucylastic said:


> "horses for courses" I have seen this from both sides. I had a dog who was perfectly well behaved and trained to what I consider to be an acceptable level. He walked reasonably well on lead, came when called, greeted people nicely, etc. I took him to agility twice. He wasn't interested. I really never did any further training with him. He enjoyed going out on walks and playing either with me or other dogs. That was enough for him He was fulfilled and happy. He was the dog for whom 10 minutes training daily was too much. The dog I have now is the complete opposite. 3 hours a day is not enough. She loves training and loves learning. She works on a shoot in winter and she does agility in summer. If she did not enjoy either of these activities, I wouldn't do them. I could probably train her for HTM but that really is not my cup of tea. I don't like to watch it but I don't deny that the dogs seem to enjoy it.


Of the two, as puppies before the were trained which would yu say was the hardest work?


----------



## lucylastic (Apr 9, 2011)

hawksport said:


> Of the two, as puppies before the were trained which would yu say was the hardest work?


The one I have now is a rescue, I suspect because as a puppy she was too hyper to manage. She is definitely much more challenging than the first one. He was very easy.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

lucylastic said:


> The one I have now is a rescue, I suspect because as a puppy she was too hyper to manage. She is definitely much more challenging than the first one. He was very easy.


That's what I thought you would say.


----------



## lucylastic (Apr 9, 2011)

hawksport said:


> That's what I thought you would say.


A little bit off topic but IMO the more challenging dogs are the ones you learn most from.


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

*


lucylastic said:



A little bit off topic but IMO the more challenging dogs are the ones you learn most from.

Click to expand...

*They sure are.....:wink:


----------



## happysaz133 (Jun 5, 2008)

Completely disagree, as long as a dog is happy to be doing tricks and is being rewarded, there's no reason why they shouldn't be taught. It's great exercise and stimulating for the dog.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

lucylastic said:


> A little bit off topic but IMO the more challenging dogs are the ones you learn most from.


and in a new class of puppies the easy ones are the one that are going to make nice average pets for average owners. The naughty one that starts off as a right pain is usually the one that will go way beyond average, if the owner doesn't give up


----------



## XxZoexX (Sep 8, 2010)

Not got through hundred-and-odd replys yet but..

Personally i think it all depends on the dog. Jack loves to learn he knows the stuff he needs to know- sit, wait ect.. But hes a much happier dog if hes kept mentaly stimulated whether thats hide and seek at home with treats or finding a certain toy out of his many. 
I also find hes much more attentive off lead when he knows i may hide his dummy somewhere. I try to tailor it all to gundog style stuff tho and go with his instincts.
I have found he has learnt a fair few "tricks" as you may call them himself for example tapping the treat cupbourd, kicking his bowl when out of water and singing for his supper (last ones a joke btw) 
As for Mums Dog Sunny he will happily do the necessities but try and encourage him to fetch a ball or anything "fancy" and he'll look at you like your stupid :lol: 

*Toddles off back to page 6 to read the rest :laugh:


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

hawksport said:


> and in a new class of puppies the easy ones are the one that are going to make nice average pets for average owners.* he naughty one that starts off as a right pain is usually the one that will go way beyond average, if the owner doesn't give up*


That's what I keep telling myself with Terence.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

lucylastic said:


> A little bit off topic but IMO the more challenging dogs are the ones you learn most from.


God, aren't they just!


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

*


hawksport said:



and in a new class of puppies the easy ones are the one that are going to make nice average pets for average owners. The naughty one that starts off as a right pain is usually the one that will go way beyond average, if the owner doesn't give up

Click to expand...

*Yes I agree and its a slight worry as this little working sheepdog pup I've just rescued is a paragon of virtue........


----------



## Nancy23 (Feb 7, 2012)

I personaly dont see the point in it and wouldnt do it with mine but a man on my road does dancing at competitions with his and they love it, if you stand talking and egnore his dog it starts dancing untill you fuss him lol  so i guess some dogs enjoy it


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

I don't believe there is such a thing as "training dogs too far".

"Controlling dogs too far" maybe - if the dog is expected to behave in a very specific way at all times with little or no break to just be a dog - but simply being able to perform a wide range of behaviours on cue; no such thing as too much imo.

For one thing, how exactly do you define a "trick" as opposed to a necessary skill?

Quite frankly, the average pet dog needs to know a grand total of 3 cues:

1) Stay where you are / don't move
2) Come to me / come with me
3) Leave something alone (ie leave / drop).

EVERY other training cue for a pet dog is a trick. Even the "basic" positions - does it really matter if your dog is waiting patiently while you tie your laces if he is in a "sit" or a "down" or a "stand"? Nope, so long as he remains stationary.

Heelwork to music makes an easy target but all other sports (done for fun or competition) are no better - the dog performs behaviours on cue for human entertainment. How can a dog performing heelwork to music be "demeaning" but performing many of the same manourvres in obedience is fine?

Aside from the issue of what constitutes tricks or unnecessary training; my other issue is the implication that training is somehow a bad thing. It sure as hell shouldb't be!!

Humane, reward-based training:

Is a great way of developing the bond between dog and handler, can help to overcome fears, build trust, etc.

Provides excellent mental stimulation, helping to prevent boredom and the behaviour problems associated with it, and can be a godsend for dogs who can only have restricted physical exercise.

Is FUN! For both dog and owner - it isn't a case of "well I guess some dogs like it..." Look at the dogs trained (using humane methods) in these things and you can see the joy and excitement on their faces and in their body language. They love it. Even the training becomes self-rewarding, because the dog will build up an association that "training = treats / toys / fun" so the very act of teaching a new behaviour is a rewarding experience in itself.

There are so many dogs that are under-trained or completely untrained that are causing problems for their owners and society at large. There are also plenty of dogs suffering from general boredom and lack of mental stimulation, many of which have developed behaviour problems as a result.
Yet here we are debating the issue of dogs being overtrained???


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

Once again, Collette, you post exactly what I am thinking but far better expressed then I could ever hope to achieve.

But, apparently, I can't give you any more rep. You've got enough already as it is though.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Colette said:


> Humane, reward-based training:
> 
> Is a great way of developing the bond between dog and handler, can help to overcome fears, build trust, etc.
> 
> ...


Sorry that is just your opinion and while for some it can be so, for others it certainly isn't


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> There are so many dogs that are under-trained or completely untrained that are causing problems for their owners and society at large. There are also plenty of dogs suffering from general boredom and lack of mental stimulation, many of which have developed behaviour problems as a result.
> Yet here we are debating the issue of dogs being overtrained???


Never a truer word said


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Rona - I'm genuinely curious which of those three statements you disagree with?
That it can aid the bond; that is provides mental stimulation; or that its fun?


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

Werehorse said:


> Once again, Collette, you post exactly what I am thinking but far better expressed then I could ever hope to achieve.
> 
> But, apparently, I can't give you any more rep. You've got enough already as it is though.


I'll rep on your behalf.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Colette said:


> Rona - I'm genuinely curious which of those three statements you disagree with?
> That it can aid the bond; that is provides mental stimulation; or that its fun?


Well I'd guess for the humans who don't enjoy training it wouldn't be fun.

I always wonder whether Wolf would have enjoyed clicker training, he was trained with traditional methods and really didn't enjoy it but maybe with a more positive approach it would have been another matter.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Colette said:


> Rona - I'm genuinely curious which of those three statements you disagree with?
> That it can aid the bond; that is provides mental stimulation; or that its fun?


That it's fun basically. 
All my dogs have done what they have been bred to do and training tricks whatever method you use just wouldn't do it for them.
I've also seen trial dogs, brilliant trial dogs that follow instruction to the letter that cannot, when put into a "real" situation, cope.
I used to go to a place where several gundog trainers came, and they all agreed that to work "properly" would ruin their dogs for trials and vice versa 
What's the point in that?
You train a dog to follow instructions at the expense of it's natural ability.
We will end up with all our dog breeds being exactly the same if we don't start seeing them and treating them as individuals.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

rona said:


> That it's fun basically.
> All my dogs have done what they have been bred to do and training tricks whatever method you use just wouldn't do it for them.
> I've also seen trial dogs, brilliant trial dogs that follow instruction to the letter that cannot, when put into a "real" situation, cope.
> I used to go to a place where several gundog trainers came, and they all agreed that to work "properly" would ruin their dogs for trials and vice versa
> ...


i've read your posts several times but cant quite decide what you mean. By the bit in bold, do you mean sometimes you can overhandle a dog? In the example of a gundog, do you mean rather than let it get on with it's work (and lets face it, it's far more aware of it's own job and surroundings than we are 99% of the time), you can put in too many commands, be a bit too happy on the whistle? And this hinders it's natural ability because we are holding it back as such?


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

rona said:


> Sorry that is just your opinion and while for some it can be so, for others it certainly isn't


I have to disagree with you. It might not be your 'thing' therefore it is not fun for you or your dog but every dog will find training fun if the handler is enjoying it and training the dog in a way that makes it enjoyable.


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

rona said:


> I've also seen trial dogs, brilliant trial dogs that follow instruction to the letter that cannot, when put into a "real" situation, cope.


These trial dogs that can't cope in a "real" situation, could it not be because they haven't been socialised adequately and spend their entire lives away from a city environment? Nothing to do with being overtrained.



rona said:


> I used to go to a place where several gundog trainers came, and they all agreed that to work "properly" would ruin their dogs for trials and vice versa


That arguement is picking up vs trialling, a different debate altogether.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

rona said:


> I used to go to a place where several gundog trainers came, and they all agreed that to work "properly" would ruin their dogs for trials and vice versa


If I remember rightly most field trial dogs are also working dogs too..

Most of the gundogs in the show ring at Crufts are dual purpose too - they work as well as show..


----------



## Twiggy (Jun 24, 2010)

*


rona said:



That it's fun basically.

Click to expand...

*


rona said:


> *All my dogs have done what they have been bred to do and training tricks whatever method you use just wouldn't do it for them.*
> *I've also seen trial dogs, brilliant trial dogs that follow instruction to the letter that cannot, when put into a "real" situation, cope.*
> *I used to go to a place where several gundog trainers came, and they all agreed that to work "properly" would ruin their dogs for trials and vice versa *
> *What's the point in that?*
> ...




I don't understand what you mean Rona....

Do you mean that dogs can't do, or enjoy, more than one discipline or should only be used for the purpose they were bred for?

My sister took part in sheepdog trials, pretty successfully, with a couple of her collies but they also competed in obedience, agility and HTM.
There are quite a number of collies that work sheep and also compete in other things.
A good friend of mine, now sadly gone, worked her golden retrievers to the gun in the winter months and competed to top level obedience with them during the summer and I have a springer spaniel bitch that trains with me at the moment who is a really good gun-dog but equally has done well in obedience competitions.


----------



## Colette (Jan 2, 2010)

Thanks for the explanation Rona.

I'm not entirely sure if we disagree about one particular point or if we just have our wires crossed.

I don't mean to say that specific tricks are fun; but that the training itself is fun. 
Reward based methods, using whatever best motivates the individual dog (eg treats, toys, praise etc) to teach behaviours that the dog is capable of doing is a fun thing to do. It doesn't matter so much whether that "trick" is sit, heel, or rollover.

Obviously this does depend on the training being right for the dog; i.e. the training must be humane, reward-based and enjoyable for the dog.

It also includes other factors such as frequency and duration of training (some dogs prefer more, some less), or how varied the training is (some dogs get bored very quickly if you repeat the same couple of cues - but excel if you vary it with a wider repetoire.*)

Indeed, the behaviour itself can make a difference - if you have a dog that finds sitting uncomfortable or awkward then obviously training the "sit" isn't going to be much fun for that dog.

I just see it as an individual thing - do tricks the dog enjoys. If not, find something different to teach. I certainly wouldn't suggest that just because the dog doesn't like "beg" or "rollover" we should stop trying to teach anything new.



> What's the point in that?
> You train a dog to follow instructions at the expense of it's natural ability.


I don't know anything about gundogs / FT but I can see why the problem would occur here - it would be a case of trying to train to incompatible things; as field trials and real gunwork are similar but not the same and it would thus be very difficult for the dog to distinguish between the two.

But in most cases this issue never arises. Just because a collie can run an agility course doesn't mean it can't herd sheep; teaching a rottweiler to beg, rollover and wave has no effect on its ability to compete in working trials.

So long as the behaviours being trained are not incompatible, or too similar as to be confusing, this problem should never occur.



> We will end up with all our dog breeds being exactly the same if we don't start seeing them and treating them as individuals.


How? In this context, how will we end up with all our breeds being the same?

Using the examples I gave above - teaching a collie to do tricks doesn't make them rubbish at herding sheep, teaching a guarding breed to do tricks doesn't automatically mean they will let a burglar into your house, teaching a husky tricks isn't going to put an immediate end to his desire to run or his high prey drive. It simply doesn't impact on the breeds traits unless you start deliberately breeding for dogs that are good at "tricks" at the expense of dogs that are good at their "proper" jobs. (You can of course breed for those that do both - the two are not mutually exclusive).


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

SLB said:


> *If I remember rightly most field trial dogs are also working dogs too..*
> 
> Most of the gundogs in the show ring at Crufts are dual purpose too - they work as well as show..


This is something I thought but apparently not so. Many people train their dogs just for trialling - they get a dog and train it with that sole purpose in mind. Others get their dog just to work, without having any interest in trialling. Some do both.

An excellent dog in the field may not necessarily do well in a trial, and vice versa simply because judges are involved and are working to J-regs, rather than just wanting to get a job done well, regardless.

Not being a know-it-all Aimee, it's just something I assumed until a few weeks ago and was very surprised to discover


----------



## BumbleFluff (Jul 23, 2011)

natty01 said:


> i could never understand why a person would want to waste time training tricks...... but some dogs enjoy training , training is not work its fun , its mental stimulation for them . a lot of dogs dont need that extra training but im sure there are plenty more who could benifit from a little more input from their owners.


I waste my time teaching Blue tricks  but she's a BC and benefits from mental stimulation


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

SLB said:


> If I remember rightly most field trial dogs are also working dogs too..
> 
> Most of the gundogs in the show ring at Crufts are dual purpose too - they work as well as show..


Many field trial dogs do work too, but carefully so they don't get into bad habits. It's an often used argument, but a dog can't do well in trials unless they are good, but too much picking up can hinder their training. Doesn't mean they aren't good, or that they don't have the abilities.

There are very few show dogs are dual purpose and work, and only a handful that enter trials/tests at the lowest level.


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

Phew i am exhausted reading all that! 
The two guide dogs that stimulated my discussion with friends , both different breeds, do seem lver controlled/supressed to us. They do not behave much differently when out of harness. For example Throw a ball they do not chase it. They mainly just look at you all the time for cues and lack spontenunity. Its quite sad as its like the have lost their spirit. 
I know ,before people jump on me ,they are doing a fantastic role and are well cared for. Sometimes It doesnt seem much of a life for a young dog. One of my friends who has done boarding for guide dogs and says the same. He calls them dog slaves!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Its quite sad as its like the have lost their spirit.


I'm curious to know what this 'spirit' is? A working dog will concentrate while working. Some dogs are simply more steadier than others. I also can't help feeling that early neutering can make contribute to dogs being more 'puppyish' as they never completely mature. Do people really think that a dog has to be puppyish to have spirit? Personallly, I like a dog to mature into an adult rather than remain puppy like.


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> I'm curious to know what this 'spirit' is? A working dog will concentrate while working. Some dogs are simply more steadier than others. I also can't help feeling that early neutering can make contribute to dogs being more 'puppyish' as they never completely mature. Do people really think that a dog has to be puppyish to have spirit? Personallly, I like a dog to mature into an adult rather than remain puppy like.


No no i do not mean puppy like. I mean overcontrolled and way too well behaved !


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> No no i do not mean puppy like. I mean overcontrolled and way too well behaved !


So you mean you don't like an obedient dog?


----------



## shamykebab (Jul 15, 2009)

Georgee said:


> No no i do not mean puppy like. I mean overcontrolled and way too well behaved !


Guide Dog pups are specifically selected for their calm temperament (health & safety! )


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Leanne77 said:


> This is something I thought but apparently not so. Many people train their dogs just for trialling - they get a dog and train it with that sole purpose in mind. Others get their dog just to work, without having any interest in trialling. Some do both.
> 
> An excellent dog in the field may not necessarily do well in a trial, and vice versa simply because judges are involved and are working to J-regs, rather than just wanting to get a job done well, regardless.
> 
> Not being a know-it-all Aimee, it's just something I assumed until a few weeks ago and was very surprised to discover


Oh me too! hmm



rocco33 said:


> Many field trial dogs do work too, but carefully so they don't get into bad habits. It's an often used argument, but a dog can't do well in trials unless they are good, but too much picking up can hinder their training. Doesn't mean they aren't good, or that they don't have the abilities.
> 
> There are very few show dogs are dual purpose and work, and only a handful that enter trials/tests at the lowest level.


I am sure I remember that the labs at least at Crufts '10 were dual purpose.. maybe I am mistaken (again :lol: ) But I did mean they were working/show dogs rather than trial dogs..


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

SLB said:


> I am sure I remember that the labs at least at Crufts '10 were dual purpose.. maybe I am mistaken (again :lol: ) But I did mean they were working/show dogs rather than trial dogs..


You're probably thinking of the Gamekeepers Ring at Crufts were the majority will be working, but will include some show, dual purpose. The Gamekeepers Ring predates Crufts and was the original 'show' to display working dogs before showing became a hobby in itself. The classes vary from those that work on a shoot (in whatever capacity, picking up, beating etc) and classes for dogs that have won an award at a field trial but they have to have done some sort of gundog work. But it's a completely different ring/competition to the showing side


----------



## spaniel04 (Nov 27, 2011)

rona said:


> That it's fun basically.
> All my dogs have done what they have been bred to do and training tricks whatever method you use just wouldn't do it for them.
> I've also seen trial dogs, brilliant trial dogs that follow instruction to the letter that cannot, when put into a "real" situation, cope.
> I used to go to a place where several gundog trainers came, and they all agreed that to work "properly" would ruin their dogs for trials and vice versa
> ...


I don't really understand what you are trying to say. One of my spaniels is a trialling dog but I also work her. I am just very choosy where and how I work her. She comes out rough shooting with me because all the same skills required in field trials are needed when it is just the two of us, hunting within range, steadiness to flush, good marking ability, excellent retrieving, and of course no vices like noise or hard mouth. If that is not a spaniel's natural ability in its purest form I don't know what is?
What these gundog trainers meant was something totally different. A beating dog will flush hundreds of birds during each and every drive on a commercial shoot and couldn't possibly be expected to sit to every flush. There is no need for it. A beating dog will also very quickly learn to pace itself unlike a trialling dog which will run flat out for the duration of its run in a trial which can be anything between 10 - 45 minutes depending how quickly they get a flush. 
I could take my trialling dog to any shoot on any day and work her and not embarrass myself. The same cannot be said about a lot of non trialling working gundogs.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> You're probably thinking of the Gamekeepers Ring at Crufts were the majority will be working, but will include some show, dual purpose. The Gamekeepers Ring predates Crufts and was the original 'show' to display working dogs before showing became a hobby in itself. The classes vary from those that work on a shoot (in whatever capacity, picking up, beating etc) and classes for dogs that have won an award at a field trial but they have to have done some sort of gundog work. But it's a completely different ring/competition to the showing side


No I know that but I'm sure I heard that a few of the show dogs were actually working dogs when they weren't in the ring.. it was 2 years ago though..


----------



## natty01 (Sep 4, 2011)

Georgee said:


> Phew i am exhausted reading all that!
> The two guide dogs that stimulated my discussion with friends , both different breeds, do seem lver controlled/supressed to us. They do not behave much differently when out of harness. For example Throw a ball they do not chase it. They mainly just look at you all the time for cues and lack spontenunity. Its quite sad as its like the have lost their spirit.
> I know ,before people jump on me ,they are doing a fantastic role and are well cared for. Sometimes It doesnt seem much of a life for a young dog. One of my friends who has done boarding for guide dogs and says the same. He calls them dog slaves!


i dont know for sure , but maybe guideogs are not exposed to playing ball during there training because it may constitute a distraction , some dogs especially retrievers can get distracted by a ball and if they are taught specifically to ignore a ball being thrown about that may explain why they dont chase them. also a lot of guide dogs arent allowed off lead in public when they are with there blind person because of safety reasons so maybe they just didnt have the oppurtunity to learn to play ball at a young age .
dogs which arent clicker trained and have been trained using the do this methods often do nothing in the abscense of a clear instruction for example if you try and play the 101 things to do with a box game with a non clicker trained dog it often wont get it initially because they arent encouraged to think and make decisions in the same way as a dog thats been raised on clicker training .


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2012)

IME its not true that training a dog for one task makes them useless for another. Now, if I teach a SchH heel, Im going to lose some points in the AKC ring, but I dont consider that the same thing. Those are stylistic differences, the dogs competence for the task is not diminished.

I think this mentality stems from old school training methods that dont allow the dog choices or encourage thinking.
For example in the breed ring, it used to be that owners were advised to never teach the dog sit for fear the dog would sit in the breed ring. Hogwash. If the dog has a proper stack on cue hes not going to sit. Now you see dogs go from the obedience ring to the breed ring with no issue.

My own dogs have no issue going from being crazed, balls to the walls silly dogs to getting themselves under control and ready to work. Just because they are well controlled in a work setting doesnt mean they dont have butt-tuck zoomies when released.

I love this article by Suzanne Clothier, and it touches on a lot of the myths about working dogs. Drive and brakes and steering | Suzanne Clothier


> What needs to be remembered is that strong herding lines herd, retrieving lines retrieve, hunting dogs hunt, sledding dogs run, guarding dogs guard, etc. Instinctive behaviors that are strongly selected for will be expressed strongly. *Whatever behaviors your dog exhibits strongly, the basics remain the same. Instinctive behavior must be appropriately channeled and put under direction and control*.


Which circles back to training. There is no _over_ training if you do it right 

With modern, rewards based training, there really is no limit to how much a dog can learn and succeed at. Plus dogs are masters of understanding context and can easily navigate the different venues.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

Georgee said:


> Phew i am exhausted reading all that!
> The two guide dogs that stimulated my discussion with friends , both different breeds, do seem lver controlled/supressed to us. They do not behave much differently when out of harness. For example Throw a ball they do not chase it. They mainly just look at you all the time for cues and lack spontenunity. Its quite sad as its like the have lost their spirit.
> I know ,before people jump on me ,they are doing a fantastic role and are well cared for. Sometimes It doesnt seem much of a life for a young dog. One of my friends who has done boarding for guide dogs and says the same. He calls them dog slaves!


This is partly down to their personality, though. My mum owns a Golden Retriever who has not really been trained beyond come, sit and lie down. He never needed it. His personality is naturally extremely obedient and he's a very happy and contended dog. It may be construed that Harry has 'no spirit' but no, it's just the way he is.

I don't think chasing a ball is a measure of 'spirit' either. My Lab won't even entertain the idea of chasing a ball, it's just not her 'thing' or mine for that matter.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

I would imagine Rupert came across as dull and unspirited while out actually. He had a ton of personality at home but out on walks he mostly walked along by my side. If I released him to sniff he'd go and sniff around but he wouldn't play or really do anything while out. He'd often just stand there looking around.

In the house however he was an absolute clown. Bouncy, exuberant, silly and extremely loving. He was overflowing with character.


----------



## sskmick (Feb 4, 2008)

We do or rather did train Duke to do tricks, they did serve a purpose, he is a hyperactive dog and by training him it kept him focused and eager to play/learn. It was a good way of calming him down.

He had lots of fun, lots of treats we were happy being able to channel all that negative engery in a postive way - no problem.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Georgee said:


> Had discussion with friends today about this and wondered others views here? My dogs areweell trained in that they know sit , stay, leave it , bed, fetch etc things that i feel are essential to keep dogs and humans living happily together
> I cannot understand however why people want to train dogs to do "tricks" that serve no purpose
> Those over trained dancing dogs on crufts makes me feel uncomfortable for example and remind me of dancing bears.
> I can only think this type of training is for entertainment of humans?





Georgee said:


> I am not sure about the arguement that dogs "need" tricks to be stimulated? Is this to replace their natural instincts? E.g collies to herd etc
> I just feel seeing a dog roll over or dance demeans the dpg


Not read all the thread yet so apologies if someone has already said this but you are looking at this from a human perspective. From a dog's persepective, it is no more demeaning to be taught to "roll over" than it is to be taught to "stay". To a dog it is exactly the same. Neither is more demeaning than the other. It is only your missplaced human sensibilities that are offended, not the dog's.

Right, going back to read the rest of the thread now.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

I don't see any problem with teaching a dog more than the basics "sit/down/stay/drop" etc, however all dogs need mental as well a physical exercise, it just depends on the breed how much or little, something like a BC needs massive amounts of both whereas something like a lapdog type breed won't need anywhere near as much.

Yes, there are forms of mental stimulation like agility and various toys but doing training is as others have said another way to enhance the bond between a person and their dog(s). Obediance is a way to get your dogs focused and listening.

I don't really like HTM but thats me, i can see the dogs love it and it is hugely stimulating for them.

Tummel is a mix of 3 breeds, 1 gundog, 1 herding and 1 working breed....all 3 groups are known for needing mental stimulation and as lazy as Tummel is with the physical side he has to have the training and games every day otherwise he gets a bit flustered!!! He knows a lot of different words and tricks, most tricks were taught with practical uses in mind(giving a paw for wiping or examination for example) but yes i did teach him some purely because it's fun...he doesn't need to bark on command but he does 

I never wanted what i call a "robot dog" that hangs on my every word and i definately didn't get one but Tummels intelligence needs to be used in a positive outlet(i.e training and games) so he doesn't decide to trash our house :hand:


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

Spellweaver said:


> Not read all the thread yet so apologies if someone has already said this but you are looking at this from a human perspective. From a dog's persepective, it is no more demeaning to be taught to "roll over" than it is to be taught to "stay". To a dog it is exactly the same. Neither is more demeaning than the other. It is only your missplaced human sensibilities that are offended, not the dog's.
> 
> Right, going back to read the rest of the thread now.


If you read one of my replies i state that dogs do not have a self concept and yeh i know the dog does not experience it as demeaning


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

bearcub said:


> This is partly down to their personality, though. My mum owns a Golden Retriever who has not really been trained beyond come, sit and lie down. He never needed it. His personality is naturally extremely obedient and he's a very happy and contended dog. It may be construed that Harry has 'no spirit' but no, it's just the way he is.
> 
> I don't think chasing a ball is a measure of 'spirit' either. My Lab won't even entertain the idea of chasing a ball, it's just not her 'thing' or mine for that matter.


The two guide dogs in question are not golden retrievers. One is a german shepard the other a curly retreiver cross. The ball chasing was an example. Generally these dogs are trained to the point that they do not know how to play imo. They rely on human cues. 
My own dogs are very obediant but know how to have fun too.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

rocco33 said:


> You're probably thinking of the Gamekeepers Ring at Crufts were the majority will be working, but will include some show, dual purpose. The Gamekeepers Ring predates Crufts and was the original 'show' to display working dogs before showing became a hobby in itself. The classes vary from those that work on a shoot (in whatever capacity, picking up, beating etc) and classes for dogs that have won an award at a field trial but they have to have done some sort of gundog work. But it's a completely different ring/competition to the showing side


Don't know if labs and other gundogs are the same, but among the breed classes for border collies at Crufts there is a "working" class - ie a class especially for border collies that are also worked. Hence in the dog challenge and bitch challenge there is always a "dual purpose" border collie.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Oh dear not the "if you do x with your dog you will not be able to do y with it"

These statements are made, IME, by those who believe because THEY cannot do it, it cannot be done. 

There is an old Chinese proverb.

_The person who says it cannot be done, should not interrupt the person doing it! _

I have been told by many "so called experts" that I could not do the things that I have done with two of my dogs, one in particular.

She has managed be successful in many fields, not just "moderately" either. 

There are 4 breeds which have classes for dogs with Working Trials qualifications

Border Collies
Dobermanns
Rottweilers
GSD

So the winner of these classes are in the line up for the CC.

In gundogs there are Special Field Trial and Special Working Gundog (both of which require the dog to have either gained a CoM in a FT or the Gundog Working Certificate/Show Gundog Working Certificate.

Guide Dogs do know how to play but they will have been proofed against things which would distract them during work such as food, dogs, cats, balls etc.

Dogs with too high a prey drive are not generally speaking very successful as Guide Dogs!


----------



## Guest (Feb 10, 2012)

Georgee said:


> Generally these dogs are trained to the point that they do not know how to play imo. They rely on human cues.
> My own dogs are very obediant but know how to have fun too.


Im not sure I understand what youre saying. My dogs know how to play, and do so very often, but if theyre working, they will not break off of work to go play. Yes, they do wait for me to cue them to go play. If you were to toss a ball to my dog while hes working with me he would ignore it too. Once I release him though, he will happily play with you.

I dont see that as a bad thing though?

To me if the dog will blow you off for something more interesting, thats not knowing how to be a dog, or knowing how to play, thats poor impulse control. Dogs with poor impulse control get themselves in a whole lot of trouble very quickly. 
As someone else already stated, the more training the dog has the more freedoms that dog can SAFELY enjoy.


----------



## sid&kira (Oct 15, 2009)

I am clicker training my staffy x, to build the bond between us and teach him to focus on me 

in the last 2 days he has learnt:

watch me
down
touch (target my hand with his nose)
spin 360
bow
act ashamed

i will continue to teach him random, probably useless tricks, yes its partly for my own entertainment, but mostly for him, he loves to learn and gets excited when i call him over and ask him to do something

he's not a robot at all, he has just curled up on my OH after a 15minute mad play session with one of the girls


----------



## IndysMamma (Jan 15, 2009)

smokeybear said:


> Dogs with too high a prey drive are not generally speaking very successful as Guide Dogs!


there would be a lot of blind people up trees/in hedges if they did 

the training Biggles may have to go through is pretty intense if he is to become my assistance dog but above all he will be my pet not a tool - I would never put him in a situation he found distressing or upsetting (other than vet visits of course )


----------



## spaniel04 (Nov 27, 2011)

Two pictures of the same dog. First one in play mode and second one in a trial totally focussed to the point that she forgot to put her tongue back in her mouth. :001_tongue:
Of course she can do both, she is an intelligent fun loving creature not a robot.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

This isn't aimed at anybody bu I'll tell you a story about dogs being allowed to be dogs
About 3 years ago I had a DDB come to do his KCGCs after being after his owners had met someone from the advanced class on a walk. He went through 9 weeks of training, progressed nicely and on the 10th week gained his Puppy foundation and Bronze certificates and was a happy,social puppy. he owner was asked if he was coming back to do his Silver and his reply was "I don't want a robot I want him to enjoy being a dog." He was PTS before he was 2 years old as an out of control dog with aggression issues


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Oh wow, I love that second picture :lol:

As I say, the Guide Dogs I knew knew how to play and just generally be a dog. When they were in harness however they were 100% focused on their job, not even distracted by their doggy friends walking past them (and in the case of one of my dogs whining and squeaking in his eagerness to play). I don't recall either of them playing with balls or squeaky toys but does not playing with toys really mean the dog has no spirit or is over controlled? Not all dogs like to play with toys.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Ive only ever trained my boys to do the basics, as i find training boring, and the vast majority is superfluous to my needs. So i'd hardly call mine robotic or over trained. However, if i threw a ball for either of them, i'd doubt they'd so much as look at it.

I don't know why people think dogs are born with an innate desire to chase after spherical objects, and bring them back again. I'm sure the vast majority of dogs can be encouraged and shaped to retrieve, but not everyone wants to partake in such a game. I personally find the repetitive action rather mundane.

Rather than having a whinge (again) about people who actually spend time and effort on their dogs, wouldnt it be more proactive to concentrate on the poor dogs who walk the same 15 minute pavement pound 3 times a day on a short lead, or those that get bunged in the garden as they are being a PIA in the house? Those are the robotic dogs; the ones that are so switched off and bored as they lack attention and stimulation.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

We meet a papillon hearing dog sometimes and he runs and plays like any other dog she puts the vest on him and he's completely focused of course but without it he's a normal dog. There's nothing wrong with having a trained dog regardless of the breed. Some people do push it too far and think you have to break a dog before you can train it and the poor thing barely moves unless they tell them to but those are the exception and certainly couldn't be guide dogs they have to be able to make decisions independent of the handler


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

[youtube_browser]heD1LICwrOk[/youtube_browser]
Funny I didn't think robots struggled to keep their tails still even when playing dead :lol:

[youtube_browser]DuHZ3axQ5fo[/youtube_browser]
Or get to run through mud and horrible stuff :lol:

Bless him, still miss him x


----------



## Barkie (Aug 22, 2011)

Blimey what a long thread, I had to miss some pages.

IMHO dogs that need mental stimulation and / or thrive on attention and doing something to get the reward and a pleased owner will both learn what you teach them to do and voluntarily learn what gets your attention that you don't want them to do, such as touching a box ...below is Muffin who heard me say "Good" when she was playing with a box and got a treat. So I whipped the camera out fast and touched the box and she repeated the action to get another "good" and treat from me. I also got to give her practice to do Wait in a different context.









That 'trick' may never be useful but that's not the point, instead of doing the usual stand, sit, down etc it was a new way for her to get praise and positive attention for doing something for me and feel good and clever.

If a dog enjoys itself that to me is a good reason to teach it more than just the practical things like recall, sports, activities or taking washing out of the machine for you. I don't think it matters what it is just do give that dog something to do to feel the emotion of happiness at knowing it is good or clever because that happiness and self confidence in your dog works in your favour as well as just being nice when it bounces back to you.

It's true that some trainers can go too far, you might see that when a trainer has a competition dog that does it's best, they want better performance, they put more pressure on the dog but it enjoying itself less and gets even less enthusiastic :nono:


----------



## lucylastic (Apr 9, 2011)

SpringerHusky said:


> [youtube_browser]heD1LICwrOk[/youtube_browser]
> Funny I didn't think robots struggled to keep their tails still even when playing dead :lol:
> 
> [youtube_browser]DuHZ3axQ5fo[/youtube_browser]
> ...


What a sweetheart. There's just something about a springer that gets right under your skin.


----------



## Georgee (Sep 10, 2011)

Nonnie said:


> .
> 
> Rather than having a whinge (again) about people who actually spend time and effort on their dogs, wouldnt it be more proactive to concentrate on the poor dogs who walk the same 15 minute pavement pound 3 times a day on a short lead, or those that get bunged in the garden as they are being a PIA in the house? Those are the robotic dogs; the ones that are so switched off and bored as they lack attention and stimulation.


it was not at whinge just a debate ! myself and friends noted these dogs even when OFF duty /harness lacked spontenus reactions and we wondered if this was due to over training.
We then discussed other obsessive trainers of dogs, whose dogs seem to us over trained. I would think like most things in life either extreme is bad for dogs i.e. Too much training or too little. The older you get the more you realise middle ground is good tee hee


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

Georgee said:


> it was not at whinge just a debate ! myself and friends noted these dogs even when OFF duty /harness lacked spontenus reactions and we wondered if this was due to over training.
> We then discussed other obsessive trainers of dogs, whose dogs seem to us over trained. I would think like most things in life either extreme is bad for dogs i.e. Too much training or too little. The older you get the more you realise middle ground is good tee hee


I do know what you mean, there's a Border Collie round here that doesn't seem capable of not staring up at his owner when walking.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Gemmaa said:


> I do know what you mean, there's a Border Collie round here that doesn't seem capable of not staring up at his owner when walking.


But maybe thats just the border collie intensity. Some people would consider Jessie to be the same, even Flynn hardly takes his eyes off me, but they are free to do whatever they like on walks, as long as they dont disturb people/dogs/livestock. They just choose to focus on me alot because they want to interact in some way, be that do a 'trick' for a treat or play with a toy.

I wouldnt say this is due to overtraining, just a desire to please or interact.

I can honestly say i've never seen a dog that appears to have it's spirits dampened or it's spark extinguished because of overtraining.


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

Perhaps 'not allowed' would've been a better choice of words.


----------



## Guest (Feb 10, 2012)

Georgee said:


> I would think like most things in life either extreme is bad for dogs i.e. Too much training or too little. The older you get the more you realise middle ground is good tee hee


Its kind of like eating vegetables. Is it possible to eat too much nutritious food? Sure. But nobody eats enough fruit and vegetables as it is, so even if you tell folks to eat as many fruits and vegetables as they possibly can, every meal every day, they're still not going to over-do it. Same with dog training. 
If you ask my dogs, to them there is no such thing as too much training. I have to literally drag them away from training class.

I'm one that believes every time you interact with your dog you are training, regardless of whether you *think* you're training or not. Dogs don't stop learning just because you're not actively teaching them anything, so every interaction is a learning opportunity. Dog says "hrm... when I do this, she does that" and makes a mental note. So to me if you say too much training that means not interacting with my dogs, and I'm not on board with that either.

Maybe its a question of the dog having too many cues? Nope... As someone who speaks multiple languages I can attest to the fact that knowing MORE languages makes my life easier, not harder... I imagine its the same for dogs.

I still say that the issue is probably what I would call incorrect or ineffective training. If your idea of training includes harsh corrections and restrictive choices for the dog then yes, I can see that getting really old really fast for all involved. But when training is about communicating, bonding, and interacting with your dog, its too much of a good thing for me to consider how to limit it.


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

Leanne77 said:


> But maybe thats just the border collie intensity. Some people would consider Jessie to be the same, even Flynn hardly takes his eyes off me, but they are free to do whatever they like on walks, as long as they dont disturb people/dogs/livestock. They just choose to focus on me alot because they want to interact in some way, be that do a 'trick' for a treat or play with a toy.
> 
> I wouldnt say this is due to overtraining, just a desire to please or interact.
> 
> I can honestly say i've never seen a dog that appears to have it's spirits dampened or it's spark extinguished because of overtraining.


Barney was the same, his world revolved around me and many a times I had to stay in his eyesight or he'd worry.

I could sit down in the grass and he'd sit with me, maya on the other hand will sit away from me or wander off doing her own thing.

This was how he was it wasn't anything to do with training it was the close bond we'd formed and his desire to protect me & help me.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Gemmaa said:


> I do know what you mean, there's a Border Collie round here that doesn't seem capable of not staring up at his owner when walking.





Gemmaa said:


> Perhaps 'not allowed' would've been a better choice of words.


It's a border collie thing and nothing at all to do with training or "over-training" (even if there was such a thing, which I sincerely doubt). To say the border collie in question is either not capable or not allowed to do anything other than stare at his owner shows a lack of understanding on your part about the make up of the border collie. Watch a border collie working sheep, or even one doing obedience, and you will soon see that paying such close attention to the owner is what border collies do.


----------

