I really dont think you can say he doesnt have a method until you know what it is he does.Sure he applies OC , he also applies compulsion. So does everybody else. Thats like saying every song in the key of D is the same song. There is alot more to his training than what you see on a tape. I would be interested in knowing who you believe "HAS" a training method.

Maybe this is what I should have said.Nobody can actually invent dog training, its already been done.I dont think that anyone can come up with a way to train a dog that is truely original. It all comes down to how you apply the training techniques that every body has available to them also.So a person can be original in how they apply these techniques.Call it style or call it method.Music is a good analagy there are only so many notes to be used but the but there are an endless amount variations.

On the last two notes... I agree 100% with Kevin and David.

Can anyone explain why it is becoming increasingly wrong to develop and obedient dog based the hander/owner's will over the dog's desire to work for a reward or reward potential at the basic level?

Anyone think motivation and drive cannot be later built into a dog once reliable basic level obedience is established and the dog is 100% reliable to a command?

Anyone who limits their training options is limited as a trainer I think. Better to use, mix and apply a diverse application of learning theories known to work. You should base this on the need of the dog and not on the personal desire to be an enlightened follower.

I think the fact Ivan is one of the few who actually can take the dog from puppy to the top national levels says volumes about his ability as a skilled and foresighted trainer.

He knows the answers to my questions posted above this I am certian.

Originally posted by David Morris:
Maybe this is what I should have said.Nobody can actually invent dog training, its already been done.I dont think that anyone can come up with a way to train a dog that is truely original. It all comes down to how you apply the training techniques that every body has available to them also.So a person can be original in how they apply these techniques.Call it style or call it method.Music is a good analagy there are only so many notes to be used but the but there are an endless amount variations. This is true. There really is no new way to train a dog. What you wrote was well put. It is how you use the tools that would give you a method ,system or style. The way Ivan trains (from what I have seen and heard)in ob. is the same theory as some of the older Germans. Less harsh complusion, but genrally the same idea for heeling, sitting etc. in my view.

What I have heard about his protection, and seen some of the dogs, is nothing that has been re- invented. He has an idea of the end result with his dogs, and applies what will get him there,with applications that he has mastered. This is no different then any top trainer. Take the board favorite, Bernhard; a man who gets good results over and over again, his overall principles are not much different then alot of other people's; but his apllications are somewhat different.

My hat is off to anyone that can take pups and get them on a winning streak that few have done.

Originally posted by David Morris:
Sure he applies OC , he also applies compulsion. This is a perfect example of what I think Kevin is lamenting - talking about compulsion as if it's NOT part of OC. It absolutely IS. Aversives (compulsion) are a full 50% of OC. It is NOT purely positive. That's exactly what I mean about few people can apply the tenets of OC knowledgeably.

Lee

 Quote:

Originally posted by Lee Baragona - Sch3FH2:

 Quote:

Originally posted by David Morris:
Sure he applies OC , he also applies compulsion.

This is a perfect example of what I think Kevin is lamenting - talking about compulsion as if it's NOT part of OC. It absolutely IS. Aversives (compulsion) are a full 50% of OC. It is NOT purely positive. That's exactly what I mean about few people can apply the tenets of OC knowledgeably.

Lee

I agree. So lets see where we are at:

Situation: The auto response to lets say "sit".

Conditions: Dog is taught using a systematic applied correction 3 times in a row right after the word sit.

On the fourth time the dog is not corrected but the dog, assuming the correction is coming tries to avoid it and thus sits upon hearing the word SIT.

The dog learns he can beat the correction and chooses to sit to not only beat the correction but later learns a reward (treat) follows for obeying.


Some might say the above is OC. (Operant Conditioning)

Something Bad can start or be presented, so behavior decreases = Positive Punishment (P+)


But I don't....


************************************************
Here are the "Tech" terms broken down for those who don't know.
************************************************
Something Good can start or be presented, so behavior increases = Positive Reinforcement (R+)

Something Good can end or be taken away, so behavior decreases = Negative Punishment (P-)

Something Bad can start or be presented, so behavior decreases = Positive Punishment (P+)

Something Bad can end or be taken away, so behavior increases = Negative Reinforcement (R-)

But still Im wondering about your comment earlier(Lee). Are you saying that Ivan doesnt have a method or are you saying that nobody has a method ??

By calling Ivan's method "Operant Conditioning" does make it a "method" Most trainers are training following the defination of "Operant Condtioning" to some sketch; it is how clearly one breaks down the stages of thier style (or whatever you choose to call it) and how much (or little) complusion(along with motivation) they apply to a dog that I would say makes them a talented trainer; along with what thier end result is. I would say all training styles are based on the thoery of "Operant Condtioning" I do not see a way around it.

Again, I see a similar way Ivan trains to the old Germans. While Ivan is not into the sharp-prong and heavy complusion that some of the (he likes the uuuhhnooo and electric) older German's are, they both want the dog to let's say heel. That is the safe spot where they are going to be realsed to be played with if they stay in line. If not compulsion is applied. For the down and recall, they both use the signaled non-reward. They both are training in the thoery of "Operant Condtioning" So because Ivan explains his way of training using words like "Operant Condtioning" and "Exotic Animal Trainer" (on his tape) this is just a way of explaining what he does. He does not have the pattern on "Operant Condtioning", he just can explain in detail how he gets what he wants out of a dog. Some may find it easy to follow, others may get lost along the way. For new people I think the tape is hard to follow, and is better served with some hands on work with Ivan to grasp what he is really doing. There is stuff that is a bit brief and left to the imagination to the novice I think.

Going back to the first question, has anyone seen the way he trains applied to dogs that have problems and he is successfull at working the problem out of the dog?

I don't understand what this means (from a previous post) systematic applied correction 3 times in a row right ?
What is a systematic correction? Does this mean the dog gets a correction each time until it is right? Please explain.
Ivans method teaches that the opposite of reward is not a harsh correction but withholding of the reward.
I am hoping someone who has trained a hard dog this way will jump in the post and offer training
stories or tell us how it worked.
Cathi Windus