What is Possible?
Recently I heard an interview with a very well known competitor/trainer. He said "positive training works with dolphins.....it is not possible to train a dog without physical contact; it's a lie…”.
Physical contact means pain compliance.
My first thought was, "How egotistical is THAT? If you can't do it, no one can?" Let's call that my irritable reaction.
My irritation was soon replaced by sadness, however, because if positive reinforcement training is "not possible", then what sane person would attempt it? If a "top trainer" ridicules the possibility, then the message to thousands of less experienced trainers is clear: do what is proven to work, regardless of the outcome for the dog, or the sport. If a young trainer decides to attempt positive training anyway, the blatant ridicule, followed by subtle sabotage, will usually drive them away from the sport or into the hands of tradition soon enough. It takes a strong and courageous person to do something that others say is impossible, and few individuals want to play the fool, especially if they are relative novices themselves.
If you want to be a successful competitor, the safest route is the known one. Many of the most accomplished competitors have very little to offer outside of their method, which often crams every dog into exactly the same hole they've been crammed into for thirty years. Yes, these folks win. If winning is the most important element for you, then it makes sense to go with what is proven to work. But, when well regarded trainers or competitors state that a progressive method is "not possible", you discourage innovation and set dog sports in the wrong direction.
Wouldn't it be better to say, "In my experience, positive training does not work."? That phrase opens up a place for dialogue and the possibility that you may be confronted with evidence, which might, over time, allow you to change your perspective and try something new.
If the world of today had been described to me thirty years ago, I would have been unable to process what I was hearing. I would have had no way to reconcile such unbelievable information with what I now know to be real and true. The possibility of video telephones, computers, internet - I would have laughed at you. If you had told me that athletes were breaking records that were considered physically impossible, that science had taken us inside of cells and DNA and into the very heart of what makes us human - I could not have heard you. Big Science was a test tube baby, not Dolly the cloned sheep.
If you had told me that I could use food to train a dog; that a plastic toy called a clicker could help me with my training, that I could wait for a behavior to occur and then name it rather than creating each behavior... I would have made fun of the waste of time and the "stupidness" of it all. I was young and opinionated. I knew it all, and if I wasn't doing it, then it wasn't worth doing.
While it's sad to see such a close minded attitude on a thirteen year old, it's relatively harmless since no one is listening anyway, but coming from a well known trainer with excellent skills and insight to offer... it's damaging and cause for great concern.
The world of today was NOT POSSIBLE just thirty years ago. Outside the realm of comprehension. Yet it's here, not only possible, but now reality. So if the not possible can become reality, isn't it better to try and stay away from absolutes in our thoughts and speech as much as we can? There are so many places to throw up barriers and argue that something is not possible. Honestly, it makes me tired even thinking about it, which is why I have waited a while to broach this topic. The words that come out of our mouths frame the reality in our heads. Close your mind to new possibilities and you are right, it will not happen for you.
I cannot predict where a changed mindset will take you, any more than I could have predicted that Dolly the Sheep was possible. The possibilities suggest, however, that the dog/human relationship can be so much more than what tradition and prior experience may have led us to believe.
I made the change to positive training techniques many years ago, but it was only two or three years ago, when Cisu began failing in the ring, that I made a complete change in philosophy to dog as partner rather than dog as subject. I can't wait to see what I'm doing in five years, because really, I've just begun to explore the avenues of possibility that are appearing in front of me, and they seem endless. There is so much to learn.
Training is a journey, not a destination. If you think you've arrived, you've already missed out.
52 comments
If you are doing “competitive” obedience it is ALL about the score! No one gave me any OTCH points two weeks ago because my dog and I had fabulous team work and he looked happy (we NQed on directed jumping). The team who took home HIT and HC also looked great, the dog was happy, the handler was happy. I am eager to win…I am not satisfied with being at the bottom of the class. In my area there are no “average” competitors in the B classes. The vast majority of the dogs competing in the B classes are field goldens with OTCHs. None of these trainers are “average” trainers. They all spend huge amounts of time and money to win the classes. I don’t even compare myself to the “average” trainers and maybe that is part of my problem.
I guess that there are different types of “winning.” And we all need to figure out what our objectives are prior to going to our shows. If you feel that you would have more fun in Agility, then no explanation needed! But if you are having fun in Obedience, there is nothing wrong with a 194.
Robin, with my OTCH dog, my average score in Open was 198 and in Utility it was 197 – over about the 30+ shows it took me to get an OTCH. My current competition dog, Cisu, is at about a 197 in Open and a 196 in Utility. Though, on some level you may have missed the point. I no longer go to the shows to win. I go to show how beautiful my dogs are and to show what the sport can be. If more people showed a beautiful picture, then the AKC judges would start judging the part of the obedience standard which states that a dog show show the “utmost is willingness” in obedience. That part is currently ignored in favor of straight sits.
And for those who point out that the person in question comes from Schutzhund, both of my dogs are “v” rated both overall and I have “v” ratings in each field individually, along with multiple 100’s. But…the point in not what I have done….it is making a choice to see what is possible.
Robin, it’s possible you have never had access to a person who could show you how to use positive training effectively for a competition dog. Positive trainers simply don’t have the 80 years of experience using compulsion to get dogs in the ring that the traditionalists have. That means if a person wants to do it, they have to make their own path. there is also a numbers game….if people don’t know it’s possible then they don’t even try.
I’d also like to point out that an awful lot of traditionally trained dogs never make it in the ring, or give up because they cannot qualify or get the scores. I know because they come to me for retraining when they are ruined. Sometimes I can help and sometimes not.
Laura, if positive methods are so effective, then why aren’t experienced and successful trainers using them more? Well, the answer is that they ARE using them and they are getting great results. They are also blending in the compulsion that is necessary to get a sustained 10 minute performance. I will tell you the difference between dolphins and dogs. There are NO marine animal shows where the animals must perform for 8-10 minutes with no rewards. A Utility routine is 8-10 mins long and a mondio ring performance is over 30 minutes. You can not get reliable behaviors for a long period of time with no rewards unless you are using compulsion. I don’t know any dolphin trainers who sleep with their dogs in their bed or who spend their weekends lounging on the sofa while they knit with their dolphins. That is just silly!
Denise, I wish that you were correct. Many people have been saying what you are saying for the 8 years I’ve been active in competitive obedience. I’ve been going to trials at least once a month for the past 8 years in the midwest. I always talk to the people who win Open B and Utility B because I want to understand what type of method they use. What I have found is that the more compulsion they use, the more they win.
I thought that I might be someone who could “prove that it could be done” in a more positive manner. Finally I have given up on it and decided to pursue agility where I can enjoy more success. I don’t like correcting my dogs. At the same time I dislike being at the bottom of the B classes while people who use heavy compulsion and e-collars win the class with a 199.5.
In my area, most of the placements go to field golden retrievers who are trained with e-collars.
Today I am driving to Cleveland Ohio for the annual trek to the Cleveland Classic dog show. This is the first year that I will not be competing in obedience. I’m predicting that Open B will be won most days by a woman who told me 5 years ago that “you know nothing about dog training”. She was angry at me because I was in line to get a puppy from the same litter that she was in line for (a famous field golden line). Because I don’t have an OTCH and she does, she said that I should “get a dog from the pound”. Well, the breeding failed and I ended up with a 5 month old Australian Shepherd from comformation lines. Because Olive was an older puppy, she had already been named and registered with the
AKC by her breeder as “Little Miss Sunshine” after the movie. It is the perfect name for her. A year later the angry woman finally got her field golden and named her “Little Miss Sunshine”. She has been competing in Open B…I haven’t seen her score less than a 199 in any of the AKC results. Her training methods are extremely harsh and her results
are exquisite. She almost always wins HIT. My training methods are mostly positive and my results are mediocre (my average score in Open B has been 194 and my average score in Utility is around 190). If I was showing Olive at Cleveland we would be ranked
near the bottom of the class.
I am just sick and tired of being at the bottom of the class. In 30 years, if I can figure out how to win while doing obedience in a kind manner, I’ll go back to competitive obedience. Otherwise you’ll see an 80 year old woman with a walker and great distance skills on the agility world team in 30 years.