The more I've read, the more I've trained, the more of a positive trainer I've become. I want a thinking, active partner and have found that training with corrections just shows the dog what to avoid. Marker training creates an active dog that *wants* to figure out what you want.

I use corrections for unacceptable behavior. And I teach the word "no" and expect my dogs to respond to it. But then I go back and build a foundation of what I want and set the dog up for success in performing the behavior I want.

Any growling at me is met with one huge correction then I drop it. Resource guarding gets the resource removed and only given back under my terms - usually some self control and then they get it where they can't guard it. I don't let the behavior work and I don't give them a chance to practice the behavior.

I don't believe there are quick fixes in training. I used to be a fan of Caesar Millan. Because I think the base idea is correct. Dogs need some structure and exercise and without those problems will happen. But sadly, it seems he has gone the way of quick fixes, flooding, overwhelming and declaring the dog "cured". Now I cringe when I see snippets of his show. He's shutting dogs down more than rehabbing them.

I don't want a shut down dog. My first dog came to me shut down - wouldn't come out of the corner on her own for 2 weeks. She had learned that it was better to do nothing than to get something wrong. It was a strong motivation to me to focus on teaching dogs what I want and giving them chances to get it right. To teach in multiple environments and proof behaviors before adding in corrections to training.

I want an active partner who thinks and tries stuff. Because at the end of the day the dog who tries stuff with go the extra mile for you, with you.

So how do you train? and Why? What kind of progressions or changes have you made to your training style?

So how do you train? and Why? What kind of progressions or changes have you made to your training style?

Interesting question. For me - as for others on this board - switching to marker training was a huge step forward. I used to do a lot of luring (still do for some things) and positioning the dog (e.g. teaching down by pushing the dog into position, then rewarding) which seems old fashioned now.

Not to derail the thread, but one change in training style (ho ho) - many years ago when I was growing up we had a GSD (an "Alsatian" back then in the UK) that my 10 year old self taught to negotiate an obstacle course that I constructed with my dad (jump fence, stand on barrel, crawl under tarp etc.) I had never seen agility - I got the idea from an army dog demonstration I saw on the BBC. I made it up as I went along - I remember teaching Sheba to go under the tarp by crawling under there myself with treats. She was a sweet smart dog, and it worked.

Maybe I should revisit the idea of training by personal demonstration? Could be fun with the retrieve over jumps....

when I first started really training my dogs ( first one nearly 25 years ago ), I didn't really know exactly what I was doing , but I somehow instinctively knew that the relationship was key , and that the relationship would be better for both parties if it was based on some kind of reward and engagement with the dog . the first toy that I used to play with and reward the dog with was a rubber ring , which allowed me to be playing " with " the dog at the same time he was playing with me .

I think my approach was largely influenced by my first exposure to a working SAR dog . he was a beautiful , all black ( intact ) male GSD , who was owned and handled by a very large , very macho , semi pro football player . without getting into the gory details , let me say I witnessed a lot of " how NOT to train / build a relationship " with your dog , although what I saw was considered pretty standard dog training for that era , late 60's early 70's . fortunately the dog was resilient enough to withstand that kind of handling , and the owner was kind enough to let me handle the dog on occasion . perhaps it was because I felt some empathy with that dog ( my dad handled me pretty rough too , although again , probably pretty standard for the era ) that I sought a more co-operative relationship with that dog , one where we took enjoyment in each others' company .

by my second dog ( 15 years ago ) , I was starting to understand more the formalities of reward based training , but it wasn't until I got henry in 2012 that I attended the ME school and really put some technical theory , knowledge and specific skills into practice .

on the other side of the coin , much of the advice I offer on this site , ( like that given re food / feeding on that other thread ) is based purely on my own common sense , and what I think is best for the dog , and the owners' / handlers relationship with that dog .

I have one dog that I am firmer and more demanding with, and another that I'm softer and more upbeat with - though the upbeat gets better training results from both of the dogs training is motivational and measured use of correction when there are serious behavior problems. I aim to use just as much force as necessary. My dogs lead a managed life that sets them up for success as much as possible - things like not leaving cats loose in the house with a cat aggressive dog. I have learned when things are my fault (most of the time) vs. the dog's fault and I never, ever punish the dog for behavior that I have allowed to occur - verbal correction in the moment, if warranted, with management of, or removal from, the situation. I've rarely had to do more than this over the past 12 months. I have never stopped seeing progress using these methods. I reckon myself an amateur handler and I always try to keep learning, and doing, better.

My 'native' style of handling conflict is very, very heavy handed. This encompasses a very wide scope of my life. The training methods that I have learned through Leerburg have helped me find more effective ways of handling things.. that have also translated to other parts of my life.

I trained forever with "kohler type" methods and had a lot of luck with them, AKC titles for the most part.

About 12 yrs ago I found marker training. Partial Operant Conditioning in that there were no physical corrections at all.

With my now 11 yr old GSD we have SAR training in cadaver, live find, article search. AKC CDX, AKC HT, his ATTS TT and his CGC.

I don't know that I would do this again but I wanted to see how far I could go with it. It worked because of the absolute best dog I've owned in 60+ yrs.

My younger GSD, now almost 8 has been brought up the same way but I haven't done anything with him other then his ATTS and his GGC. I dearly love the big clown but he's way to handler soft for my nervous system. I've been told in the past that I need a dog that's willing to bite me in the ^$$.

I'm just a nice old granpa now.

I love the marker system but I believe that ANY training system requires an excellent dog/owner connection that includes pack leadership at the very top.

Without the respect of the dog your training can never reach a high level of off leash control. I've seen many high level competition dogs that would still steal the bread right of the counter and weren't worth a squat outside the competition ring. What's the point?!!

I've said in the past that a good, reliable "truck dog" is more important to me then any high level competition dog and I've had both in a few dogs but ALL fit the "truck dog" description.

House manners training is much easier now then it was on my dogs of the past but I still believe firm but fair is the basis of any good dog training regardless of method.

Reward based training opened my ACDx up to learning all sorts of behaviors and built our relationship.
Using the principles of reward based learning on calves I have been able to get 5 of 8 including 3 bulls to put their face into a halter, willingly. That has made a huge difference in the halter breaking experience this year.

The English Shepherd does not respond as well for me to marker training. I find I regress into a little crank and yank with this dog.

Never toss out training tools that you know to work.

Balance is the best method!

Besides the good posts above, I'd add that in all possible instances, I train for what I do want rather than correct for what I don't want.

 Quote: Connie Sutherland

Besides the good posts above, I'd add that in all possible instances, I train for what I do want rather than correct for what I don't want.

Me too, keeping in mind; it looks a lot like what I don't want in the beginning. No matter how you train......the patience of Job may be required.

 Quote: Connie Sutherland

Besides the good posts above, I'd add that in all possible instances, I train for what I do want rather than correct for what I don't want.

me three!

I've always said it's much easier to train a dog then it is to break bad habits.

Good training is consistency.

Bad habits are a lack of consistency in your training.