I'm still very new to the 'real' dog world and still unsure on training techniques and corrections. I'm curious to find out how hard people are on their dogs because at the moment i've been hearing lots of opinions.

The one opinion is that you don't need to be hard on your dog. This person's dog has great drive and an amazing heel an obedience but sometimes bites the handler and occasionaly doesn't come when called, out of defiance.

On the oppostite end of the spectrum is someone who has an incredibly hard dog that can take a kick and high voltage and come back with a smile on his face, or come back with a fight. This person says the pressure makes his dog better and builds him up stronger. The dog is happpy, friendly with people, knows who the alpha is and achieved a 280 under a wusv chief judge.

I know the most important thing is the dog because that determines how hard you can be but do you believe in being hard on a dog or not?

You'll never get a straight answer on this, because everyone trains differently and has their own beliefs. Rarely do people cross over from one side of the fence to the other once their belief system is already in place. The most likely switch, is hard trainers attempting to be more positive and motivational, but old habits die hard.

At the end of the day, the way you choose to train your dog comes down to what you feel you get the best results with. All I can say is, keep an open mind and don't listen to the trainers that insist that their way is the only way.

Often trainers that are obscenely hard on their dogs have never given other methods much of a chance, or they tried it, didn't see results as quickly as they would have liked, or lacked the technique to get the results they seek, so blow it off as a bunch of crap.

 Quote:

This person says the pressure makes his dog better and builds him up stronger.

This is a common belief especially here in Europe. How true it is I do not know. Once you go one way with a dog then you won't know how that same dog would have done by training another way. Trainers will let their dogs grow up as dominant as possible, correct the dogs to the point where any dog worth his salt is going to fight the correction, then break the dog down into submission to the handler. I have worked some phenomenal dogs that were trained this way. Unfortunately, I haven't seen dogs from those same bloodlines trained any differently, so I couldn't tell you if their phenomenal performance has anything to do with how hard the handler is on the dog. Bare in mind, the dogs can handle the harshness of the handler without shutting down, probably such as the dog you refer to with the 280.

Personally I'd rather see a happy dog that gets a little cocky than a dog that ducks his head and acts anxious waiting for the correction. The reason behind why the dog bites the handler is an important differentiation. A motivationally trained dog is unlikely to be handler aggressive, and more likely just mouthy. A problem that can easily be fixed if it is indeed a problem. The defiance in the recall can also be fixed without a heavy hand, it is down to the trainers ability rather than the method the trainer uses. A dog trained with a heavy hand can also have a crappy recall if not trained correctly.

This is different for every dog I own yet always for the same reason. I assume you mean hard on your dog as in what kind of corrections are required.

I currently have 6 dogs at my home. Three can be sufficently corrected 99% of the time using a voice correction (in my house it's a "HEY!") with the final straw being a simple light touch to gain compliance. These are my soft (as in nearly squishy) dogs which are driven but very easy to correct. I can if I get into the moment over correct them verbally and have a few times done so where the dog is apologetic submissive far too long. Basically what I want is a correction where I get compliance but not submissive apologies (roach back, butt dragging, etc) . If I'm getting submissive apologies I'm getting the wrong behavior from my dog. With these dogs I never use a collar correction, it's just not needed.

The two middle sized dogs (an aussie and a spaniel) are my two that simply require a standard leash pop on a flat collar. Too hard and again, it's an overcorrection and not what I'm after.

Lastly my large dog which is a labrador is what I consider a pretty hard dog anything short of a prong and most of the time you'll get a doggie version of the middle finger. Happily most of the time these days she's very compliant and was an exceptional learner. When proofing or extincting bad behaviors like dangerous jumping up (like while holding a gun, or hitting people from behind) she was a challenge as she doesn't respond to verbal corrections at all.

I don't believe in being hard on a dog, I do believe in correcting behaviors which are defiant which I believes strenthens my bond with the dogs as their leader. I think that being hard on a dog for the sake of doing so damages the relationship I build with them.

As with all things with my dogs the first and last question is "am I being fair to my dog?"

I am very thankful that the internet has given me the access to to good people I've found who have demonstrated the effectiveness (in terms of dog's attitude toward work AND reliability) which inductive, respectful, humane, hands-off foundational training accompblishes. These are people who've achieved the heights of their respective fields.

Heck, in a morbid sort of way, I suppose I've even learned a thing or two from the A-HOLES I've met here and there who take great pride in how HARD they are on their dogs....simply by contrasting how appealing the other way is.

Even now, as I continue my attempts to further refine my communication with my dog, I'm finding the word "defiance" is occrring to me less and less as a possible explanation of behavior.

I am not a professional trainer, but I agree it depends on the dog. I have 3 dogs, all terriors, all have a different level of correction for them. Bindi is very soft dog who occassionaly will try and sneak and not comply with what she knows I want. All I have to do is look at her, and she quickly changes her tune.
Cody (JRT mix) is another matter, he has needed me to get his attention, once I had to physically grab him on both sides and hold him still and give a very firm correction. It did get his attention, he has remembered it and responds now quickly in that area. I have never had to hit him or anything.
My newest dog is extremely sensitive. When I correct or give a command to my other two, even though she hasn't been trained at all she tries to understand and do it herself, even if I am not addressing her.
I am learning alot and am excited what new things I will learn as I train my dogs. So, far, I take it one dog at a time. I like Ed's approach to dog training, fair corrections, positive reinforcement, being a fair pack leader.
Of course my dogs are not in comparison to dogs used for police work or protection work and I have never had a dog like that, though I wish I had.
consistent, fair, quick corrections, with positive reinforcement have worked well for me so far. But I am just a beginner. Look forward to reading all the other posts on this.
It is like raising a child. You can get the best How to raise a wonderful child book, but each child is different so you have to tailor what you know to their personality. The most exciting thing for me is to watch and learn about my dogs personality before I begin and what how they are shaped and changed by training.

I think there is some misunderstanding between the pet definition of "hard on your dog" and the working definition of "hard on your dog" as it pertains to this thread.

Hard on your dog is not about how hard the correction is that you give to the dog, it is about the style of training that you use.

For example, hypothetically speaking:

One trainers dog breaks his long down, and the trainer simply goes "eh eh" and re-positions the dog back where they were, makes the down a little shorter, then marks and rewards while the dog is practicing correct behavior.

Another trainer that is considered a "hard trainer" will drag the dog back to the original position using a sharpened pinch collar, kick the dog hard in the ribs and stim the dog on a high level on an e-collar all within the space of 5 or 6 seconds. The dog does not shut down, the dog can handle the corrections, the dog is a hard and dominant dog, and perhaps if you had seen the dog 3 months earlier he would have tried to attack the handler for that kind of correction.

Both dogs may have a motivational foundation, but at the point of proofing, trainer "A" above might train under the belief that a dog that is happy to do the work and is rewarded for correct behavior results in a stronger bond with a happier to work dog that, given time and patience will perform reliably. The above trainer "B" trains under the belief that the dog knows what he is supposed to do and there must be a serious "you must do it" consequence for disobedience. And, as the OP stated about one trainer he met, trainer "B" may train with the belief that being hard on a dog makes them harder and tougher.

This is not about "what level of correction" a dog needs, it is about the style of training that a trainer works under. A totally separate issue from something pet owners ever deal with.

Mike's got it spot on. One person was telling me exactly about how all the european trainers are really hard and that's what type of dogs they want. I'm pretty sure mine wont need much, if any, voltage but was interested in knowing what people thought about the matter. I mean if you have an intense high drive dog that is as tough as nails is it ok to shock, kick, pinch, smack etc IF the dog is 'cool' with it?

As you said Mike, most of these top dogs are trained this way so it's hard to if say positive marker training would be effective on them but what are your opinions? I mean do you think a really hard dominant dog will just respect the handler if he's soft and the dog gets away with what ever he pleases. Won't the dog just say stuff you I'm not in the mood for downing or 'aus'ing?

Hi My bad training method have changed sense finding this forum.

Phoenix as a puppy got hard correction very hard.
I was raised where kids and dog both get wooped for acting stupid. Never learned to train then correct.
Now she only needs a sparp bup bup and she gets back on track.

Bruiser even as a puppy needs a good hard leash pop and verbal command also.
He is a very stronp willed puppy.

I do all positive training now unless they get really out of line. Then a sharp leash pop on a flat collar.

The other 2 fosters wear heavily abused you really look at them the wrong way they tuck tail and roll.

I would never lay a hand on a another dog. But phoenix got a spanking as a puppy but now she is a registered theropy dog and doing great.


Just my 2 cents

Bravo, to the Mikes! You guys are brilliant! I can only speak from my limited experience:

"I mean do you think a really hard dominant dog will just respect the handler if he's soft and the dog gets away with what ever he pleases. Won't the dog just say stuff you I'm not in the mood for downing or 'aus'ing? "

That dog absolutely won't respect a soft handler. I know, that dominant working lines GSD I got as a "pet" needs consistent rules and regulations by me. I think it ultimately depends on the circumstances though. If he's in the throws of sudden excitement to go visit a cat on our walk, and I haven't anticipated his sudden movement towards it, then I need to give a good hard correction with the prong or e-collar to get through to him at that moment. But, if I've anticipated that behavior of said cat, a much lower correction, perhaps even just a stern "NO" is all that's required.

Strength of human is required to back it up, though. When I was a bit less confident my noodly weak arm couldn't seem to control my 100 lb wild dog at those moments. Now, however, I have pumped up my confidence to where I can indeed control him at all times. It's been a work out of the mind, you could say.

I speak from a "pet" owner perspective.