So, the recent kuvasz thread made me think about how different breed groups are trained.

It seems historically the best breeds for obedience training were those that had been bred to work with people: herders and gun dogs. These dogs want to please people, so they responded well to correction based training, which was the norm. The smartest and driveiest would excel, but the rest would still comply to the compulsion. Many breeds, however, would not learn readily based on the compulsion, and therefore deemed "stubborn" or "un-trainable" or "stupid." The kuvasz thread comes to mind, with the 6 month old pup being attempting to be trained with compulsion to no effect.


However, with the popularization of marker training (most people using clickers), it seems that many of the "un-trainable" breeds are now being brought up to levels of obedience seen only in the "most trainable" dogs of 20 years ago, with those trainable dogs now reaching incredible levels of precision and training.

My question is as follows:

Which breeds now have potential (not at the highest level, but certainly able to compete) that did not before? Why?

I am of the belief that any dog can do anything as long as it is genetically capable of doing it... Any dog can do OB (and compete in it) - but it takes a special genetic makeup to do Schutzhund, or therapy dog work...

I think this has always been true. It's just that now more people are involved in dog training than there were 20 years ago- more women and young adults are getting involved. Training has evolved into a much more "enjoyable" thing to do. 20 years ago if you trained a dog, it was to teach the dog a job or for a specific competition.

Training a dog these days is much more fun for both the dog and the trainer. There are more fun events to do with your dog that anyone can get into- like flyball or agility or rally or dock diving.. etc. It's not just the "big name trainers" with fancy papered dogs anymore.

I don't think any dog/breed has ever been "untrainable"- there are just more oppportunites now for the dog to reach his/her potential. There are more tools/methods available to teach the dog and motivate the dog in a much more positive way.

As usual, I ramble. Did I make any sense at all?

Kelly, You made perfect sense and good points.
What a great topic of discussion, and I totally get where you are coming from John! Many breeds were known as "difficult".
When I'm out with my mobility service dog Eddie I Get all sorts of comments like..."how did you train a Great Pyr to do all that??!!!??"
It was marker training that made it possible.
I think that all breeds now have the potential to do it with enough work invested.
Some will enjoy it more than others though. I think that it goes more to temperament at this point....within the breed considerations that apply.

Terriers are in the "stubborn" classification when it comes to dog training. I disagree.
One of my brothers and I both owned Kerry Blue Terriers in the 80s. Neither one of our dogs were defeated in earning their CDs. My brother's was HIT in his very first AKC trial from the Novice class. Both consistently earned scores in the mid to high 90s.
Mine was retired after two legs of his UD. (My fault) My brother's died of peritonitus (sp) after earning his CD and CH within two weeks of one another. The only time brother's dog was defeated in the breed ring was at a Specialty where he went reserve to the WD.
I will add that these two dogs required totally different training based on their individual personalities/temperaments.
I hate the use of difficult/stubborn/flipping you the bird/etc when it comes to describing dogs. If the training has been done with consistency and clarity there would be no difficult/stubborn/etc.

QUOTE - Max v Stephanitz
"Let the trainer examine himself when the dog makes a mistake, or does not understand the exercise, or fails in obedience and let him ask "WHERE AM "I" AT FAULT!?

"QUOTE - Max v Stephanitz
"Let the trainer examine himself when the dog makes a mistake, or does not understand the exercise, or fails in obedience and let him ask "WHERE AM "I" AT FAULT!?"





"I hate the use of difficult/stubborn/flipping you the bird/etc when it comes to describing dogs."



+1

being a novice I will not comment but will definitely keep on reading...very interesting indeed

 Quote: Bob Scott

I will add that these two dogs required totally different training based on their individual personalities/temperaments.
I hate the use of difficult/stubborn/flipping you the bird/etc when it comes to describing dogs. If the training has been done with consistency and clarity there would be no difficult/stubborn/etc.

Could you describe how the training had to be different? By this do you mean different reward levels, intervals, or intensity?

Each dog is different, and you have to tailor your training to the dog you have in front of you.

I have 5 dogs. Each dog's training has been different in some aspects.

Rewards: Drift is not food motivated, so her rewards were not food based. Toni is VERY food motivated, so we stuck with food rewards longer that I would have for a different dog. Caterina is motivated by physical touch and food, so I alternated between treats and pats for her. Tyra would die for a frisbee but won't tug, so frisbee was her reward. Shyner is terrified of everything, so her reward was often taking the pressure off and stopping the session.

Learning curve- dogs learn at different rates: For Tyra I had to break excercises into tiny steps for her to move forward. She just couldn't grasp a larger step. I also used other dogs to motivate her and to model a behavior for her. She's the only dog I've had to do that for, but once I introduced another dog into the training sessions, Tyra learned so much faster.

Corrections: Most of my dogs will take a fair correction and come back and work. However, I also have 2 dogs that will shut down if corrected more harshly than using a flatter than normal voice.

You can equate a room full of dogs in a beginner OB class to a group of kindergardeners. Each is a unique being. What works for one, may not work for others... just like kids...

As a trainer, you have to be in tune to your dog, know what it's motivations are, what it's quirks are, etc. To be a good teacher, you have to be a good "listener" and be observant.

Trainers also have to understand that dogs have good days and bad days. Toni is the dog I train with the most, and there are just days when she's distracted or just doesn't want to do much. Work with the dog you have in front of you- on those days I change my training to be more in tune to what Toni is thinking and doing... I may do something different to help motivate her to work- and I will cut the session short rather than have it turn negative with frustration.

There is no such thing as "cookie cutter" training as all dogs are different. Knowing your dogs, in my opinion, is the most important thing. If you know your dog, you can do anything with it.

All just my opinion, of course.

I agree wholeheartedly with the comments by everyone so far about why we are seeing so many more breeds competing successfully in obedience. I think the evolution of training methods and the increased opportunities for people to get involved in obedience for fun and competition are huge factors.

In my training club, I would say the largest percentage of members have Golden Retrievers, Border Collies, Shelties, Belgian Tervurens, then there's a middle tier of members with Labs, Poodles, Dobermans, and a variety of terrier breeds. We're an AKC club, so although we do have GSDs, most of what I see is show line and not working line. Likewise, I have seen very few Malinois and Dutch Shepherds.

In the category of breeds you don't expect to see doing obedience, one of our members has been very successful with Alaskan Malamutes, earning numerous advanced titles not only in obedience but agility, as well. She also does dog-sledding with them. Other members are competing successfully with Saint Bernards, Keeshonden, Bassett Hounds, Bernese Mountain Dogs, Schipperkes, Bichon Frises, Dachshunds, Bullmastiffs, and Newfoundlands. Not a complete list, but you get the picture!

 Quote: John Vanek

 Quote: Bob Scott

I will add that these two dogs required totally different training based on their individual personalities/temperaments.
I hate the use of difficult/stubborn/flipping you the bird/etc when it comes to describing dogs. If the training has been done with consistency and clarity there would be no difficult/stubborn/etc.

Could you describe how the training had to be different? By this do you mean different reward levels, intervals, or intensity?

All the above!
My 9yr old GSD Thunder has been a serious, clear headed, thinking dog since he was a pup. I think I basically read the book to him and he did it. Sounds crazy but that's damn near how easily he learned.
GSD #2 Trooper is 6 yrs old. Hyper, constantly moving, waaaay to easy to stimulate. He is also an easy dog to train but I can't get excited around him and need to use very low level praise. Even when petting him I need to be calm and quiet or he turns into the Tazmanian idiot.
Both have been marker trained. Both have an excellent understandg of marks mean reward.
Thunder has excellent drive for food or a tug. Preferably the tug. That's always my choice also, for any dog. He's easy to talk to. Easy to correct vocally.
Trooper is crazy about anything if it involves doing something with me but it's critical I stay neutral in my actions and voice. To much excitement and he looses it. Even petting him has to be very calm. No friendly slapping on the sides or rough housing. To harsh with my words and he gets crushed. Fortunately he's very forgiving when I get upset.
My wife says watching me train Thunder is like watching art happen. She also says watching me train Trooper is like watching an ADHD trainer work with an ADHD dog and she says it's worth getting out the lawn chair, a bag of popcorn and a soda pop.
I think she's making fun of us.