Jump to content

Koehler Training In Sydney?


ursus
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't really have any questions aside from, do you really think that is good work?

To be honest if that is the video that is held up as an example of how amazing Koehler training is, it's pretty unimpressive.

I haven't read much of this thread past the first 2 pages but watched this video and have to agree with huski, that video was VERY unimpressive in regards to quality obedience work. What was with physically putting the dog back in position confused.gif Each to their own. If someone wants to use that method and thinks they get quality work from it then let them live in their own little world! The woman looked completely miserable with her dog, not to mention her dog probably wanted to be anywhere but there. Why be there if it is that unenjoyable?

Agreed, that was absolute rubbish, and they both looked unhappy.

Didn't take much notice of the human, but the poor dog looked miserable and really stressed out, especially in the figure eight.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 293
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted by Kavik Engagement is having the dog engage with you actively in an activity (play/tug/food/running etc).

Which is exactly what Koehler is doing. It is a silly or supeficial understanding to say that Koehler is not engaged in an activity with the dog simply because the first week of training (training, is that not an activity between dog and handler?)the dog is ignored. The dog is ignored precisely to get his attention on the handler so that a co-operative activity may begin - namely training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, my first video wasn't a great success lol. I rushed it, didn't actually watch it properly and agree that it wasn't a great example. Obviously the dog wasn't ready for trialling. This next video is a better example of a Koehler trained dog. As you will see, the dog does not 'perform' with the same energy and drive as a Micheal Ellis trained dog. Some of us prefer this type of dog.

Sorry, itsadogslife, but I watch that video and just think 'yuck'. At best that dog is going through the motions. Where is the engagement with the handler? The dog isn't even looking at the handler, it's responses to commands is slow, I really struggle to understand why anyone would prefer that dog to one that is up, happy, works with a good attitude, has focus and drive and clearly loves to work. I am not saying every dog has to look like Michael Ellis's Mal, but even my beagle has a better working attitude than the dog in that video.

Edited by huski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Kavik Engagement is having the dog engage with you actively in an activity (play/tug/food/running etc).

Which is exactly what Koehler is doing. It is a silly or supeficial understanding to say that Koehler is not engaged in an activity with the dog simply because the first week of training (training, is that not an activity between dog and handler?)the dog is ignored. The dog is ignored precisely to get his attention on the handler so that a co-operative activity may begin - namely training.

Ignoring the dog cannot produce engagement in the way that Ellis is describing. With Koehler the dog is aware of the handler to avoid the leash pop. Not the same thing at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is what is expected in obedience it certainly killed any desire I had to give it another go lol doesn't look like fun at all.

My dog sure is having fun in the obedience ring! Being a baby UD dog in her first trial she got the first part of the exercise wrong, but just look at that happy face and her enthusiasm to try again! That is what it's about!! She got it right in the end and we have a very happy dog and handler :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Kavik If that is what is expected in obedience it certainly killed any desire I had to give it another go lol doesn't look like fun at all.

There are other things in life, called responsibilty, good manners. I suppose ditching good manners and responsibility and the satisfactions that come from good behavior for having "fun" is what you call an improvement. I don't.

Now please don't start complaining that oh, my dog is well behaved and responsible etc. They may be and that's good if they are. But if that is the case why do you and others seem to criticize everything on the basis, that oh, it's "not fun".

I don't see anything in anyone's training philosophy here other than it's got to fun. We have to have fun, fun, fun.

Now I suppose I'll now have endure post after post of people abusing me and about how sorry they are for my dog. As if teaching resposibility and good manners excluded having fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me regardless if the dog is "having fun" I look at the video you posted and think yuck, that work is just plain bad. I wouldn't be happy if my dog responded so slowly to commands, and I choose to use the methods I use because I honestly believe they build a better, more reliable dog and produces better quality work. You only have to look at the top winning triallers across the country to see what methods they use. If koehler was so great, why aren't all the winning competitors winning with his methods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Kavik Ignoring the dog cannot produce engagement in the way that Ellis is describing.

Exactly. They are training two different things. As I have said if training the behavior that Ellis gets is what you want, then great. Everybody should get what they want. I just wonder why a certain, very small section of the dog owning population has such keen interest in bad mouthing others from getting what they want.

Ellis is not training the same things as Koehler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whaaaat?

It stands to reason that if a dog has fun then it is more likely to want to train and be compliant (because compliance = I get to have fun).

Engagement is about a lot more than just looking up at you (reminds me of the people who hold food to their face to teach watch and are convinced their dog is watching them). As the Michael Ellis video explains it is about teaching your dog how you will communicate with him/her and building focus. The rest is just tricks IMO.

No one is saying that the dog has fun to the exclusion of everything else. I have a very well mannered boy who is a great family pet and does agility and yes, we have fun together. I have never had to use corrections with him (he is a soft boy and would shut down). He is very focused on me and would be a wreck if I ignored him for a whole week. The Koehler method seems to imply I should do this anyway, regardless of his temperament? II've recently started showing him his tug before an agility run and say "you want this, you gotta work for it" and he's like a jack-in-the-box. Not crazy mal style (I don't have the skills or fitness level to handle one) but he's enthusiastic and focused.

One of the reasons I have avoided doing any formal obedience is that the vast majority of clubs are very traditional and most people look like they're at a funeral when they're at a trial. I really don't see the point. FWIW, my dog heels with a lot more enthusiasm and focus that the videos you posted and I trained him heel by accident. I can break into a full sprint and go at a snails pace and he never lags or moves ahead and never loses focus.

I don't really see the point of having a dog if you aren't both enjoying the experience?

But all of this is way OT, the OP wants to raise a dog that isn't aggressive and, if aggression does get displayed, they want to work with a trainer/behaviourist that has a full bag of tools to help them. They're talking to Steve so they'll get this. I would be very suprised if his program was "ignore the dog, yank, yank, yank"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If koehler was so great, why aren't all the winning competitors winning with his methods?

The dog in the above video did win the trial lol. Perhaps all the other dogs were trained with clickers?

Regardless of what methods the other competitors used, the standard was obviously very low if the dog in that video scored the highest. It certainly wouldn't have won against any of the top handler teams here in Australia.

Would you really be happy with a dog like that? I am quite baffled why you'd prefer a dog that worked to such a low benchmark when there are other methods that will give you a better quality dog, with more reliability and faster responses to commands etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If koehler was so great, why aren't all the winning competitors winning with his methods?

The dog in the above video did win the trial lol. Perhaps all the other dogs were trained with clickers?

Very much doubt it, you'd be hard pressed to find a club that trains the level of fun and engagement that is being talked about here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're talking to Steve so they'll get this. I would be very suprised if his program was "ignore the dog, yank, yank, yank"

Steve's methodology is teach the behavior, train the behavior, proof the behavior. It's the same basic methodology that Koehler uses. So you shouldn't have any problem then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can teach good manners and making good choices through having fun

Not if the dog has something more fun to do.

This statement shows that you don't really know what reward based methods and clicker training is all about. This is very common with "traditional" trainers, they think that clicker training means the dog is free to do whatever it wants at all times and you just click and capture it whenever it happens to do something right.

So for the record, that's not how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can teach good manners and making good choices through having fun

Not if the dog has something more fun to do.

You make sure the dog doesn't have something more fun to do :)

As I said SG has a program doing just that. Self control/impulse control and motivation, no corrections. Consequences for poor choices? Certainly.

Edited by Kavik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...