Focus? Is my dog really focused on the task at hand? How do I know if they are?
We as humans tend to try to "multi-task" and do more than one thing at the same time. How well we can do more than one thing is debatable. Our dogs are capable of doing the same thing to some degree.
There are signs that we can easily recognized when our dog has lost focus - they go off sniffing, they run over to something interesting or they take off running 90 mph in large circles. However the times that we don't often recognize are when the dog is still doing obstacles in sequence. The dog may be sniffing as they are doing them or they may be looking over their shoulder as they do them or they even may be looking ahead but their mind is elsewhere.
Having just competed in an AKC trial where my Pyr Shep by all accounts appeared to be focused on agility however to a very keen observer she was most often not totally focused on the job of running agility. On our first standard run of the weekend she was running quite well until we got to the table. She slammed on the brakes two feet from the table. I felt the judge's presence behind me and knew instantly that she and he had made eye contact. It took me three tries to get her on the table. This is a recurring problem that became very bad last year at an AKC trial with a male judge who had a loud voice. This time, once I got her on the table - I just asked her to get on it - we left the ring and had treats to reward her herculean effort to work through a fear and get on the table.
The next day in that same ring with the same judge on a standard course she ran slower but fine until the table again. She went up and put one foot on it and then backed away from it. It only took two tries to get her on it and she went down easily. I decided to keep going on the course this time and she flew through the rest of the course and we had a party. On day three the male judge was in the JWW ring and we ran there first. She was distracted on the start - I could tell her mind was elsewhere. She came off the start line slowly and then as we turned toward the weaves she veered off them as if there was a strong magnetic field on the weaves pushing her away from them. I knew instantly that her mind was on the judge. Now Feisty is a very interesting dog, she has a lot of concerns in her life but she also likes to work through her fears. I've said all along with her that she doesn't like to be afraid - she likes to feel tough and be in control. So as we were renegotiating the weaves (I don't like her to think it is OK to avoid an obstacle - I made that mistake once and it took a while for me to train her that she must do each obstacle) she was wanting to approach him albeit reluctantly. I knew she was concerned about him. He was being quiet and still. I tried to get between him and her and help her out. She did the weaves but then as the course curved back toward him she squirted away from him again. I just kept running as if the course went that way.
My point in sharing all of this is that so often we think a dog is focused on us just because they are looking in our direction at the start line. However just like humans we can look at each other when one is talking but our minds can be elsewhere. A keen observer or one that knows their dog well can tell the difference. I know when Feisty is slow to come off the start line that it is not a hearing problem but a listening problem. Her mind is not really listening for my release but is thinking of something else. She scans the ring and scopes out what equipment is out there and who and where the judge is. In Feisty's case stress and lack of focus are often combined.
I saw the same things in Tay all weekend, she was not focused on the tasks at hand however hers was not tied to stress as much as Feisty's. Even though I run with her at the start line I can tell when she is not focused on starting with me. She is the queen of going through the motions and looking like she is doing agility when in reality she is not paying attention to my cues and she will turn wide or miss an obstacle. Hitting the weaves at speed requires a lot of concentration for green dogs and she could not handle it all weekend long. At home with minimal distractions she can do weaves with speed from anywhere. Trials are very distracting for her. She can do weaves in group classes and with set-up distractions that I create. I'm finding I have to be more vocal and I have to make my signals more exaggerated at trials than I do in training in order to keep her attention. It is not in my comfort zone.
I realized that last year when I pulled Tay off the start line for not staying and when I corrected her for not stopping on her dogwalk contact that I created stress on those two things. I did so because she had lost focus and didn't realize what she was supposed to do. I should have, in retrospect, addressed her lack of focus/attention instead of lack of performance of a behavior. I can see now when she is not focused on the task at hand and I've been able to shout at her (again not in my comfort zone) and I've seen her visibly startle and then she performs the behavior. That tells me that she really was not with me thinking about the task at hand but her mind had wandered off. It also explains why she often will take tunnels way out of the way on a course.
I used to think Tay may be suffering from ring stress but I believe it is lack of focus. There have been a few times when she has been stressed due to other factors (scary smells etc.) and I can tell she is stressed because she has "whale eye" when running and often she will visibly shake. But when she is not focused her nose will be on the ground when running or she will be looking at obstacles instead of at me for direction. She does best on complicated courses where I have to keep moving and doing a lot of crosses - it keeps her attention. The wide open flowing courses (of the lower levels in agility) give her too much time to let her mind wander. She is talented though and she can do long sequences by going through the motions but I can tell she is not giving me 100% of her attention.
Tay and I ran two days of a seminar (half days actually) and she ran great - she was fast and focused. I know she has the skills to do agility and she is well trained for the game. Something about trials causes her to be distracted. Many years ago I used to be a nervous wreck showing my dogs but since then I have learned that I can survive just about anything that happens in the ring. I think just about everything and anything that can go wrong on course has happened to me and I've survived. So I really don't worry about things at trials. I try to be the best I can for my dogs. It is a continuing challenge to read my dogs and I wish I could anticipate how they will be before we step to the line instead of having to adapt to the situation as we run. So far I have not found any precursor clues to let me know how focused my dogs will be before we step to the line. But just like us, their moods can change the minute they step into the ring. They feel the energy from everyone around them and even if I'm not stressed there are plenty of stressed people out there. The judge could be stressed, the ring crew could be stressed, the exhibitors waiting are stressed, the dog that just ran could have been stressed and left a trail of stress pheromones - many things are possible that are beyond my control.
At this point all I can do is know the signs of lack of focus versus stress in my dogs. Sometimes the two are related and sometimes they are not. We have to learn to become excellent observers of our dog's behaviors and of our own behaviors.
I recommend if you have a dog that performs inconsistently at trials that you keep a detailed journal of every run at a trial. Feisty has kept a detailed journal and my goal is to keep one that is more detailed than hers so I can learn to recognize patterns of behavior and signs that will impact her behavior on course. I'm slower to learn than she is about these things. This weekend I came one step closer to the solving the puzzle known as Feisty and the puzzle known as Tay.
Annelise
Monday, June 29, 2009
Monday, June 8, 2009
Herding and Learning styles of dogs
I consider myself still having a lot to learn about herding even though technically I've been doing it for many years. When I first started with Leysha I really didn't have a clue what I was doing. I didn't have a chance to go for regular lessons and at the time I didn't have access to sheep on a regular basis. I knew I had a dog who knew a lot more about it than I did. We some how managed to earn our ASCA started sheep and ducks titles with very little training, in retrospect. We earned our last sheep leg when I opened the take pen and the sheep used me for a launching pad. I seriously hurt my back and became afraid of take pens after that.
When we moved out to Stacy I had use of my neighbor's sheep for the first year or so and then I got a few of my own for awhile. Then Nancy bought some sheep and wanted to keep them there. Having access to sheep I learned a little more - I spent more time observing sheep behavior. I also got some ducks.
Then Nancy introduced me to Marc Christopher clinics. I audited my first one and learned a ton. I finally started to figure out what we were doing. I had read some books on herding but it didn't click until Marc drew pictures and demonstrated things. While his methods are very different from what most Aussie people use I have found that the technique of using a line to help the dog be correct in learning flanks and learning walk-ups has been invaluable. Instead of using a line just to keep a dog under control, the line is used as a training tool. It helps slow things down for the people and for the dog. Being able to work with Nancy on teaching foundation herding skills using March's methods to Sinco has been great.
For my "thinking dog" Sinco, the line method of training has made a huge difference. She likes to be shown what to do and doesn't like trial and error learning. A lot of the Aussie training methods, of which I learned more about this past weekend, seem to use trial and error learning. But unlike a clicker that marks the correct behavior, in herding the wrong behavior is corrected by the handler/trainer putting pressure on the dog. I think this would have been a very hard way for Sinco to have learned her flanks. Using a line and helping her to be right and releasing pressure when she is right seems to have worked well for her. This may be in large part to her learning style. She doesn't like to be wrong and she likes to be shown how to be right.
Now that we are progressing in her our herding training I see that there is a need, maybe just for my dog but I suspect for other dogs out there too, for a combined training method. Again like in agility there are different learning styles and there are different ways to train things - the same is true in herding. We are starting to use some of the training techniques the Aussie folks use with Sinco to help her learn to cover her sheep. When she knows what she is supposed to do and a correction is given she responds readily to it. Just as in agility, when she is corrected for making a mistake in a behavior that I know she knows how to do she can handle it. However being corrected when she doesn't know how to be right is very stressful for her.
I think there is room for lots of training techniques and the one size fits all approach just doesn't always work.
The other thing that I've been learning about in stock dogs is that there is a trend favoring the "tougher" stock dogs. I think part of the idea is that these dogs will handle cattle better but I also think part of it is that they will handle correction based training better. I've learned that many of the older Aussie lines from which Sinco comes (on her dam's side) had softer temperaments. Apparently many of the ranchers didn't know how to work with a softer dog even if that dog was keen on stock. So they bred away from these lines and are breeding for harder and harder dogs. When dogs are tougher on stock it means that they will need a handler/trainer who is equally or more tough. I've seen these dogs in agility and herding with people who are not up to training a dog like this. I know I've learned that I don't do well with a very hard dog. The sensitive dogs can still move stock and run fast in agility. It may take more finesse and more thoughtful training to get to that point. As many of you have seen Sinco in agility - she started out very slow and careful in her learning and now is running quite fast. I will say that she is not an easy dog to train and she may not have done well with a novice handler/trainer. Sensitive dogs are often not easy dogs to train either, they may not be very forgiving. A harder dog may be more forgiving but they can be harder to get a point across if they find things self rewarding.
I honestly think that a softer thinking dog can be a fine stock dog and can be just as tough on stock if trained properly. So much of moving stock is about the confidence and presence the dog has. The handler also has to have confidence in their dog too so that it goes down the leash to the dog.
I've had hard-headed Aussies and BCs and give me a softer dog any day - they are much more fun to train and do not require the 2 x 4 to get a point across. I'm not into physical violence :) If every training session is going to be a knock down drag out battle then it is not at all fun for me - I've been there and done that and it is just not enjoyable for me.
So knowing the kind of dog you like to work with is very important when selecting a dog. The kind of dog that works well with one person may not be the kind that works well for you. I know many people who do not do well at all with the softer dogs. Sometimes we have to try on different types of dogs before we find the kind we like to work with.
The main thing is that just because a dog is soft/sensitive doesn't mean that dog can't be fast and successful in agility or be tough enough to work stock.
Annelise
When we moved out to Stacy I had use of my neighbor's sheep for the first year or so and then I got a few of my own for awhile. Then Nancy bought some sheep and wanted to keep them there. Having access to sheep I learned a little more - I spent more time observing sheep behavior. I also got some ducks.
Then Nancy introduced me to Marc Christopher clinics. I audited my first one and learned a ton. I finally started to figure out what we were doing. I had read some books on herding but it didn't click until Marc drew pictures and demonstrated things. While his methods are very different from what most Aussie people use I have found that the technique of using a line to help the dog be correct in learning flanks and learning walk-ups has been invaluable. Instead of using a line just to keep a dog under control, the line is used as a training tool. It helps slow things down for the people and for the dog. Being able to work with Nancy on teaching foundation herding skills using March's methods to Sinco has been great.
For my "thinking dog" Sinco, the line method of training has made a huge difference. She likes to be shown what to do and doesn't like trial and error learning. A lot of the Aussie training methods, of which I learned more about this past weekend, seem to use trial and error learning. But unlike a clicker that marks the correct behavior, in herding the wrong behavior is corrected by the handler/trainer putting pressure on the dog. I think this would have been a very hard way for Sinco to have learned her flanks. Using a line and helping her to be right and releasing pressure when she is right seems to have worked well for her. This may be in large part to her learning style. She doesn't like to be wrong and she likes to be shown how to be right.
Now that we are progressing in her our herding training I see that there is a need, maybe just for my dog but I suspect for other dogs out there too, for a combined training method. Again like in agility there are different learning styles and there are different ways to train things - the same is true in herding. We are starting to use some of the training techniques the Aussie folks use with Sinco to help her learn to cover her sheep. When she knows what she is supposed to do and a correction is given she responds readily to it. Just as in agility, when she is corrected for making a mistake in a behavior that I know she knows how to do she can handle it. However being corrected when she doesn't know how to be right is very stressful for her.
I think there is room for lots of training techniques and the one size fits all approach just doesn't always work.
The other thing that I've been learning about in stock dogs is that there is a trend favoring the "tougher" stock dogs. I think part of the idea is that these dogs will handle cattle better but I also think part of it is that they will handle correction based training better. I've learned that many of the older Aussie lines from which Sinco comes (on her dam's side) had softer temperaments. Apparently many of the ranchers didn't know how to work with a softer dog even if that dog was keen on stock. So they bred away from these lines and are breeding for harder and harder dogs. When dogs are tougher on stock it means that they will need a handler/trainer who is equally or more tough. I've seen these dogs in agility and herding with people who are not up to training a dog like this. I know I've learned that I don't do well with a very hard dog. The sensitive dogs can still move stock and run fast in agility. It may take more finesse and more thoughtful training to get to that point. As many of you have seen Sinco in agility - she started out very slow and careful in her learning and now is running quite fast. I will say that she is not an easy dog to train and she may not have done well with a novice handler/trainer. Sensitive dogs are often not easy dogs to train either, they may not be very forgiving. A harder dog may be more forgiving but they can be harder to get a point across if they find things self rewarding.
I honestly think that a softer thinking dog can be a fine stock dog and can be just as tough on stock if trained properly. So much of moving stock is about the confidence and presence the dog has. The handler also has to have confidence in their dog too so that it goes down the leash to the dog.
I've had hard-headed Aussies and BCs and give me a softer dog any day - they are much more fun to train and do not require the 2 x 4 to get a point across. I'm not into physical violence :) If every training session is going to be a knock down drag out battle then it is not at all fun for me - I've been there and done that and it is just not enjoyable for me.
So knowing the kind of dog you like to work with is very important when selecting a dog. The kind of dog that works well with one person may not be the kind that works well for you. I know many people who do not do well at all with the softer dogs. Sometimes we have to try on different types of dogs before we find the kind we like to work with.
The main thing is that just because a dog is soft/sensitive doesn't mean that dog can't be fast and successful in agility or be tough enough to work stock.
Annelise
Learning styles of dogs
Well it has been quite awhile since I've blogged. May was pretty much of a blur for me with all of the family stuff to do.
I just spent three days with Gail Winnick at a herding clinic in Wisconsin. It was very fun and a nice break from agility training.
Having read Stacy's blog many months ago about "Thinking dogs" versus "Doing dogs" and "Thinking-Doers" as she calls them I have really liked that way of looking at dogs. I was talking to a friend yesterday on my way home from the herding clinic and talking about how dogs have different learning styles just like people do. So I asked why do we feel the need for a "cookie-cutter" approach to dog training? We seem to recognize that people don't learn the same way so why should dogs?
I used to think (and I still do sometimes) that I would like to try to train different breeds of dogs from "different groups" such has sporting, hunting etc. so I could experience different learning styles of dogs. However as it turns out I have two dogs who are 10 weeks apart in age and the same breed with two completely different learning styles.
I discovered they were different early on when I was trying to teach them things as young puppies. I love to use the clicker when working with young puppies and to do a lot of shaping of behaviors. Tay, my black tri girl just loved the clicker. She could offer me behaviors at a rapid-fire pace as if to test my timing and miraculously she would know exactly which of the behaviors I had clicked. She was and still is very fun to teach new behaviors to. She just loves it. As a result I do have to be careful or she will offer me some of her favorites such as jump on any nearby object and sit. Not always a good thing. The down-side is that it has been extremely difficult to teach her to stay - being still is very hard for Tay.
However Sinco my little red girl had a really hard time with the clicker. The absence of a click seemed devastating to her. Both puppies were raised the same and I have never made an issue out of making a mistake. I always teach all my puppies that it is ok to make a mistake. However internally Sinco is very much of a thinker and she thinks making a mistake is just horrible - she wants to be right with every fiber of her being. So she would rather offer no behaviors than risk being wrong. At first I worried a lot about how she was learning but then I adapted. I started using luring. She loved it - I could show her what I wanted and she could be right. She is very smart and she is easy to train as long as you show her what you want. She was also very easy to train to stay.
Her breeder took her for awhile and was going to teach her to lie on the couch on her side or her back for a photo shoot. At first she tought it would be easy because she is clicker trained. However she soon discovered that Sinco did not respond well to that. As soon as she started luring her and showing her what she wanted then Sinco got into the training session. She did it perfectly for the photo shoot as it turned out.
Different dogs do learn differently. I have seen this in my students' dogs but often it is hard to tell how much of it is the dog's learning style and how much of it has to do with timing on the part of the trainer/handler. But in my side by side real-life situation I can say with confidence that dogs do learn differently even if they are the same breed and living in the same environment. I can also say that Sinco's littermate is much more interested in clicker training than Sinco is and that is two closely related dogs.
I believe that the "Thinking-doers" do best with clicker training. The "doers" are often too busy moving and not paying enough attention to what their body is doing to catch what the click is marking. The "Thinkers" are analyzing the situation or worrying about making a mistake to want to just "do" behaviors.
Just like with people, when we impose a particular training style on to a dog and it doesn't match the dog's learning style then we create stress for that dog. The more stress the dog experiences the less likely the dog is to learn anything.
In college I studied a lot about operant and classical conditioning and I worked with rats and pigeons quite a bit. I went to a mini-Bob Bailey chicken camp. I enjoy capturing behaviors when offered and I enjoy shaping behaviors however I appreciate that it is a difficult skill to acquire and I appreciate that not all dogs enjoy learning that way. It is too easy to blame the trainer for poor timing but it may be that the dog doesn't really respond to that kind of training.
The irony is that the idea was that using clicker training created "thinking dogs" because dogs could figure out how to get reinforced - solving the puzzle. I think that is an illusion. What it does is make dogs think it is their idea to earn the food reward. I think some dogs want that sense of control of the situation and operant conditioning does put the dog in control. This is very effective for many dogs. Many times when the trainer is slow to put a cue on a shaped behavior then the dog truly does establish control by exhibiting that behavior a lot of the time when it is not desired. There is a fine line between putting the cue on a behavior too soon and waiting too long.
With a dog who is worried about making a mistake it may be too much pressure to be in control of the training session. There may be a correlation between the dog's social status and the desire to control the training session. In the case of Sinco, she tends to be very submissive to people and dogs so she may have no designs on controlling any situation that involves learning new behaviors. Once she understands what is required of her then she is very willing to go do that behavior - like in agility and herding - she is not shy about stepping up to the plate for that work. But when we first started and she was first learning she was very cautious.
This is why I continue to offer training that is individualized. Even the beginner class is set up to progress at the rate of the dog and handler team. If a method doesn't seem to be working then we can try something different. I have preferred methods but often I've had to suggest different methods in order to help a dog and handler progress. Training handlers and dogs is very challenging because there are two learning styles involved as well as many other factors that can influence training progress. I have had many "teams" train contacts and/or weaves in ways that are different from the others in the class. The main thing is to try something long enough and well enough to see if it is working.
Annelise and the Aussie girls
I just spent three days with Gail Winnick at a herding clinic in Wisconsin. It was very fun and a nice break from agility training.
Having read Stacy's blog many months ago about "Thinking dogs" versus "Doing dogs" and "Thinking-Doers" as she calls them I have really liked that way of looking at dogs. I was talking to a friend yesterday on my way home from the herding clinic and talking about how dogs have different learning styles just like people do. So I asked why do we feel the need for a "cookie-cutter" approach to dog training? We seem to recognize that people don't learn the same way so why should dogs?
I used to think (and I still do sometimes) that I would like to try to train different breeds of dogs from "different groups" such has sporting, hunting etc. so I could experience different learning styles of dogs. However as it turns out I have two dogs who are 10 weeks apart in age and the same breed with two completely different learning styles.
I discovered they were different early on when I was trying to teach them things as young puppies. I love to use the clicker when working with young puppies and to do a lot of shaping of behaviors. Tay, my black tri girl just loved the clicker. She could offer me behaviors at a rapid-fire pace as if to test my timing and miraculously she would know exactly which of the behaviors I had clicked. She was and still is very fun to teach new behaviors to. She just loves it. As a result I do have to be careful or she will offer me some of her favorites such as jump on any nearby object and sit. Not always a good thing. The down-side is that it has been extremely difficult to teach her to stay - being still is very hard for Tay.
However Sinco my little red girl had a really hard time with the clicker. The absence of a click seemed devastating to her. Both puppies were raised the same and I have never made an issue out of making a mistake. I always teach all my puppies that it is ok to make a mistake. However internally Sinco is very much of a thinker and she thinks making a mistake is just horrible - she wants to be right with every fiber of her being. So she would rather offer no behaviors than risk being wrong. At first I worried a lot about how she was learning but then I adapted. I started using luring. She loved it - I could show her what I wanted and she could be right. She is very smart and she is easy to train as long as you show her what you want. She was also very easy to train to stay.
Her breeder took her for awhile and was going to teach her to lie on the couch on her side or her back for a photo shoot. At first she tought it would be easy because she is clicker trained. However she soon discovered that Sinco did not respond well to that. As soon as she started luring her and showing her what she wanted then Sinco got into the training session. She did it perfectly for the photo shoot as it turned out.
Different dogs do learn differently. I have seen this in my students' dogs but often it is hard to tell how much of it is the dog's learning style and how much of it has to do with timing on the part of the trainer/handler. But in my side by side real-life situation I can say with confidence that dogs do learn differently even if they are the same breed and living in the same environment. I can also say that Sinco's littermate is much more interested in clicker training than Sinco is and that is two closely related dogs.
I believe that the "Thinking-doers" do best with clicker training. The "doers" are often too busy moving and not paying enough attention to what their body is doing to catch what the click is marking. The "Thinkers" are analyzing the situation or worrying about making a mistake to want to just "do" behaviors.
Just like with people, when we impose a particular training style on to a dog and it doesn't match the dog's learning style then we create stress for that dog. The more stress the dog experiences the less likely the dog is to learn anything.
In college I studied a lot about operant and classical conditioning and I worked with rats and pigeons quite a bit. I went to a mini-Bob Bailey chicken camp. I enjoy capturing behaviors when offered and I enjoy shaping behaviors however I appreciate that it is a difficult skill to acquire and I appreciate that not all dogs enjoy learning that way. It is too easy to blame the trainer for poor timing but it may be that the dog doesn't really respond to that kind of training.
The irony is that the idea was that using clicker training created "thinking dogs" because dogs could figure out how to get reinforced - solving the puzzle. I think that is an illusion. What it does is make dogs think it is their idea to earn the food reward. I think some dogs want that sense of control of the situation and operant conditioning does put the dog in control. This is very effective for many dogs. Many times when the trainer is slow to put a cue on a shaped behavior then the dog truly does establish control by exhibiting that behavior a lot of the time when it is not desired. There is a fine line between putting the cue on a behavior too soon and waiting too long.
With a dog who is worried about making a mistake it may be too much pressure to be in control of the training session. There may be a correlation between the dog's social status and the desire to control the training session. In the case of Sinco, she tends to be very submissive to people and dogs so she may have no designs on controlling any situation that involves learning new behaviors. Once she understands what is required of her then she is very willing to go do that behavior - like in agility and herding - she is not shy about stepping up to the plate for that work. But when we first started and she was first learning she was very cautious.
This is why I continue to offer training that is individualized. Even the beginner class is set up to progress at the rate of the dog and handler team. If a method doesn't seem to be working then we can try something different. I have preferred methods but often I've had to suggest different methods in order to help a dog and handler progress. Training handlers and dogs is very challenging because there are two learning styles involved as well as many other factors that can influence training progress. I have had many "teams" train contacts and/or weaves in ways that are different from the others in the class. The main thing is to try something long enough and well enough to see if it is working.
Annelise and the Aussie girls
Monday, April 6, 2009
To Refresh or retrain
I often hear people talking about retraining their agility dog to do this or to do that (usually some contact performance behavior). With the greater emphasis being placed on training foundation skills for our dogs in agility I hope that there will be more emphasis on "refreshing" a behavior rather than retraining it.
To clarify: in my mind retraining a behavior means that a new behavior is going to be trained that will replace a behavior that is no longer serving the team. For example if a running contact were taught originally on the contacts and that behavior has eroded into a leaping over the contact zone then one might want to "retrain" the dog to do a 2 on/2 off behavior with a stop on the bottom of the contact. That would be replacing a behavior that is no longer working for the team with a new behavior.
On the other hand "refreshing a behavior" means that a behavior that had been working well in lots of situations has started to deteriorate. This is usually due to a lack of reinforcement or enforcement of the behavior. Sometimes this may happen due to some sort of confusion that has developed on the part of the dog which again would be due to lack of reinforcement or enforcement of the desired behavior. In this instance it is usually best and fastest to go back to how the behavior was originally taught and "refresh" the dog on what is desired. A complete retrain is usually unnecessary in these cases.
This is another reason why having a good foundation on which to build is so important. It makes training and "fixing" problems so much easier!
To clarify: in my mind retraining a behavior means that a new behavior is going to be trained that will replace a behavior that is no longer serving the team. For example if a running contact were taught originally on the contacts and that behavior has eroded into a leaping over the contact zone then one might want to "retrain" the dog to do a 2 on/2 off behavior with a stop on the bottom of the contact. That would be replacing a behavior that is no longer working for the team with a new behavior.
On the other hand "refreshing a behavior" means that a behavior that had been working well in lots of situations has started to deteriorate. This is usually due to a lack of reinforcement or enforcement of the behavior. Sometimes this may happen due to some sort of confusion that has developed on the part of the dog which again would be due to lack of reinforcement or enforcement of the desired behavior. In this instance it is usually best and fastest to go back to how the behavior was originally taught and "refresh" the dog on what is desired. A complete retrain is usually unnecessary in these cases.
This is another reason why having a good foundation on which to build is so important. It makes training and "fixing" problems so much easier!
Friday, April 3, 2009
Focus on/and Foundations
So it has been an interesting couple of weeks as a number of things have come together for me and have come full circle. I've really started to solidify my foundations classes and training more than ever. It has always been a work in progress and will continue to be so. I think each session/year it becomes better and more robust as a program. Students who come back with a different dog often remark that we are doing something we didn't do before. If I kept it the same then we wouldn't improve our skills in this sport. The sport is becoming increasingly technical and speeds of the dogs are continuing to increase so to stay competitive we need to continue to improve our training skills. I know some students who have started dogs with me 2-4 years ago and are starting new dogs now with me are finding some things are different.
The things to keep in mind about foundations training is that it is not a one-time thing. I continually revisit the "basics" of foundations with my older dogs. The beauty of having a foundation is that you have a structure or a set of exercises to go back to and review with your canine companion. There are things we as humans forget how to do and if we have resources to use to review how to do it then we are ahead of the game. If we have to figure out how to learn it all over again it can be much more time consuming.
One situation in which it is really beneficial to be able to go back and do foundations exercises with your dog is when the previously unfocused dog starts to gain focus in agility. A number of students are currently experiencing the fun of having a dog who is now mature and focused after spending 1-4 years working in agility with a very distracted dog. Dogs vary greatly in the time it takes them to mentally mature. Dogs who are sensitive to their environment i.e. easily distracted by movement, other dogs or smells are not going to be able to focus on learning new behaviors. Often with these dogs the first year or so of training is spent concentrating on improving the dog's focus. It may seem like the dog is learning some things and they may be learning by rote repetition. However the concepts that involve more thinking and problem solving will not be learned by the dog until the dog can stay focused on tasks at hand. This includes learning how and when to collect for a turn, learning how to collect to stop for a 2on/2off, learning how to collect for weave poles and learning how to stay at the start line. These are difficult behaviors for dogs who lack focus to do.
In the last few weeks I've had about 4 students who have noticed that their dogs who are now ranging from 2 to 5 years old are now able to be more focused in agility. Recently the dogs are able to do the obstacles in a sequence more reliably than ever before. These are dogs who have had a history of not being able to stay at the start, not being able to sequence obstacles reliably and not being able to perform contacts to specified criteria reliably. Most of these handlers have worked very hard with their dog by taking "Focus in Motion" classes, by working with behaviorists and independent consultants, by setting realistic expectations for the team and by having a lot of patience. The handlers are now able to start really handling the dog instead of managing their dog's attention span. Many dogs will gain the ability to focus when the leave adolescence but there are many other dogs who are not able to focus for extended periods of time until they are much older.
Some of these students have on their own and others at my urging are now going back and working on foundation exercises with these dogs. I believe that the foundation exercises will now make more sense to these dogs because they are now able to think and focus more in training than they could before. It shouldn't take long to go back to these exercises and it will help the dogs to really learn about collection, about stays, about weave entrances etc. It is an exciting for these teams because I believe they will see their rate of progress in agility begin to increase exponentially.
Working with dogs who are easily distracted (and all dogs go through this - it is the state of all young puppies) is like trying to teach someone to knit while they are standing perched at the edge of a cliff with a sharp 100 foot drop off onto rocks. It is hard for that person to concentrate on something new and complex like knitting when they are also having to focus on maintaining their balance. If that person is afraid of heights it will be absolutely impossible. So when you have a dog that is fearful or easily distracted you are not going to be able to teach them very much.
Dogs do learn some by pattern training, meaning they recognize patterns of behaviors and can learn these by sheer repetition without a lot of conscious cognitive activity. This can give us the false sense that the dog has a deeper understanding of what we want them to do than they really have. When you take the dog to new places and ask for these behaviors often the behavior will fall apart indicating that the dog really doesn't truly understand the behavior. One of the reasons for the behavior (and there are others) to fall apart is that the dog never really thought about the behavior but was in a sense "going through the motions" when doing it. New places will often really magnify the degree of inattention these dogs have. Agility requires dogs to be able to think and problem solve at speed and in different and distracting environments. Every course is different and there are a lot of different obstacles out there requiring different and specific skills. It is a complex activity for our dogs. It is not an instinctual activity for the dogs. It is really important to be sure that our dogs understand what we are asking them to do in a lot of different settings in order to be successful in agility competitions.
Foundations - not just a one time only thing... foundation exercises are for life.
The things to keep in mind about foundations training is that it is not a one-time thing. I continually revisit the "basics" of foundations with my older dogs. The beauty of having a foundation is that you have a structure or a set of exercises to go back to and review with your canine companion. There are things we as humans forget how to do and if we have resources to use to review how to do it then we are ahead of the game. If we have to figure out how to learn it all over again it can be much more time consuming.
One situation in which it is really beneficial to be able to go back and do foundations exercises with your dog is when the previously unfocused dog starts to gain focus in agility. A number of students are currently experiencing the fun of having a dog who is now mature and focused after spending 1-4 years working in agility with a very distracted dog. Dogs vary greatly in the time it takes them to mentally mature. Dogs who are sensitive to their environment i.e. easily distracted by movement, other dogs or smells are not going to be able to focus on learning new behaviors. Often with these dogs the first year or so of training is spent concentrating on improving the dog's focus. It may seem like the dog is learning some things and they may be learning by rote repetition. However the concepts that involve more thinking and problem solving will not be learned by the dog until the dog can stay focused on tasks at hand. This includes learning how and when to collect for a turn, learning how to collect to stop for a 2on/2off, learning how to collect for weave poles and learning how to stay at the start line. These are difficult behaviors for dogs who lack focus to do.
In the last few weeks I've had about 4 students who have noticed that their dogs who are now ranging from 2 to 5 years old are now able to be more focused in agility. Recently the dogs are able to do the obstacles in a sequence more reliably than ever before. These are dogs who have had a history of not being able to stay at the start, not being able to sequence obstacles reliably and not being able to perform contacts to specified criteria reliably. Most of these handlers have worked very hard with their dog by taking "Focus in Motion" classes, by working with behaviorists and independent consultants, by setting realistic expectations for the team and by having a lot of patience. The handlers are now able to start really handling the dog instead of managing their dog's attention span. Many dogs will gain the ability to focus when the leave adolescence but there are many other dogs who are not able to focus for extended periods of time until they are much older.
Some of these students have on their own and others at my urging are now going back and working on foundation exercises with these dogs. I believe that the foundation exercises will now make more sense to these dogs because they are now able to think and focus more in training than they could before. It shouldn't take long to go back to these exercises and it will help the dogs to really learn about collection, about stays, about weave entrances etc. It is an exciting for these teams because I believe they will see their rate of progress in agility begin to increase exponentially.
Working with dogs who are easily distracted (and all dogs go through this - it is the state of all young puppies) is like trying to teach someone to knit while they are standing perched at the edge of a cliff with a sharp 100 foot drop off onto rocks. It is hard for that person to concentrate on something new and complex like knitting when they are also having to focus on maintaining their balance. If that person is afraid of heights it will be absolutely impossible. So when you have a dog that is fearful or easily distracted you are not going to be able to teach them very much.
Dogs do learn some by pattern training, meaning they recognize patterns of behaviors and can learn these by sheer repetition without a lot of conscious cognitive activity. This can give us the false sense that the dog has a deeper understanding of what we want them to do than they really have. When you take the dog to new places and ask for these behaviors often the behavior will fall apart indicating that the dog really doesn't truly understand the behavior. One of the reasons for the behavior (and there are others) to fall apart is that the dog never really thought about the behavior but was in a sense "going through the motions" when doing it. New places will often really magnify the degree of inattention these dogs have. Agility requires dogs to be able to think and problem solve at speed and in different and distracting environments. Every course is different and there are a lot of different obstacles out there requiring different and specific skills. It is a complex activity for our dogs. It is not an instinctual activity for the dogs. It is really important to be sure that our dogs understand what we are asking them to do in a lot of different settings in order to be successful in agility competitions.
Foundations - not just a one time only thing... foundation exercises are for life.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Entry Fees... where do they go?
So this is not my usual type of topic for this blog but having read recent posts on lists from people complaining about entry fees and having recently experienced a fiasco with parking fees... I feel I have something to say on this topic.
I look at entry fees for various trials around our area and in the midwest (when I travel to trials at other places). If I know who is putting on the trial I will ask them about their expenses because I'm always curious about that. I'm always "shopping" for places to have trials and for ways to keep the trial costs down so I don't have to pass it along to competitors. My goal for ACTS trials is to break-even. As a business and not a non-profit or not-for-profit club I have higher overhead than they do when putting on trials at some venues. While the facility rental fees we pay here in the Twin Cities are some of the highest in the country we still have some of the lowest entry fees in the country. Certainly some of the lowest entry fees for a large metropolitan area. How long that may last is hard to say because the rental fees and expenses are continuing to increase.
This past March trial we learned that the parking police at the U of M had recently stepped up their enforcement and I was really worried that they would ticket our competitors and cost everyone a $20-25 ticket. That would have been horrible. We had been avoiding paying for parking because no one had been checking. Well at the last minute I had to buy a "lot pass" for 50 cars at $6 per car per day from the U. I thought long and hard about how to handle this unexpected additional cost. I decided to pass it along to exhibitors at a discount of $5 per car. It turned out that on Saturday the parking enforcement counted cars and found 73 there and so they charged me for the additional 23 cars at $6 each - but better that than ticketing everyone. I did not quite collect enough money in parking fees to cover this cost. Smaller trials like the ASCA ones may get by with paying for fewer cars on a lot pass and they pay significantly less in rent than I do so they also may be able to "eat" the cost of the parking passes more than I can.
One thing I've learned is that the rental fees Agile Canines pays to Leatherdale and SoccerBlast are among the highest in the country. Agile Canines is a business, not a non-for-profit, so I have to pay more for weekend rental at Leatherdale than the ASCA or MAC do. This is a rule of the U of M to charge less for the clubs. Simons Arena and the Isanti barn are also higher in rent than other places around the country. These facilities do not provide equipment rental either. At Leatherdale I have to pay $500 a day compared to $300 that the clubs pay plus $6 per car for parking. For an average ACTS trial that is 75 cars (an additional $450 per day). SoccerBlast charges all groups the same - $1200 per day and parking is included. When I research other areas and the rent they pay it is often less than than $800 per day and often this fee will include equipment rental.
The other factor that goes into entry fees is the cost of ribbons. For CPE trials where we use 500 qualifying ribbons per trial that is a large additional expense.
When you look at your entry fee and where the money goes keep the following in mind:
Judges are paid $1.00 per run (some AKC judges are paid more than this) as long as the dog is listed in the catalog/running order regardless if they run or not.
Clubs pay on average $1.00 per run to the parent organization for recording fees (AKC and USDAA have higher rates and different fee scales)
Ribbons for double flats you can figure that the Q ribbon is around $.70 to $1.00 and the placements may be less. Rosettes run around $3.00 each.
Toys per dog are about $2.00 each.
For an ACTS Leatherdale trial that has 400 runs a day you can figure that $1.25 of your entry fee goes toward rent (not including parking)
Then there are the judge's expenses - airfare, hotel, meals and judging gift. This varies a great deal but very often airfare can be as high as $500 especially for judges living near smaller airports. Often judges can't fly out until Monday morning so there are three nights of a hotel stay. So you can figure that at least $1.00 per run goes toward judge's expenses.
Look at the break down of where an $11 entry goes:
$11 per run
- $1.00 judge fee
- $1.00 org recording fee
- $1.00 ribbon cost
- $.25 toy cost
- $1.25 rental fee (indoor venues or outdoor venues with porta-potty rentals)
- $1.00 judge expenses
- $1.00 for miscellaneous expenses such as sanctioning fees, trial secy' expenses for paper, ink, software updates, general office supplies for the trial, gas and truck rental.
- $.50 per run for worker lunch (when it is not a potluck - $.25 per run when it is a potluck)
Then when you consider that 25% of all entry fees for an ACTS trial come in the form of worker vouchers... that amounts to a further discount of $2.75 in cash per run.
- That leaves a $1.25 per run in cash to cover additional costs that may arise - like parking fees at Leatherdale, new title pins and other special awards, costs for equipment maintenance and purchase of new equipment. This is why I felt it was necessary to pass along the cost of parking at a discount to competitors otherwise I would have lost money on the trial.
So before you complain about entry fees increasing you need to look at how much it costs to put on a trial. There is not much money (and sometimes no money) being made at the ACTS trials so I really do it because I enjoy doing it and I feel I am supporting the various parent organizations by doing so.
For 2010 there have been rental fee increases announced by some of the places we use for trials as well as other expenses increasing. Do not be surprised if entry fees start to increase later this year and into 2010. You may also see groups cutting back on things in order to help cut costs.
Other expenses that many clubs incur - paying trial secretaries (can be thousands of dollars per trial), renting equipment and higher recording fees to their parent organization.
In addition with the changes and improvements made in equipment requirements for the different agility organizations it is expensive for agility groups to keep up with these when putting on trials. Many clubs in the area are updating their equipment and adding rubber granules to their contacts and looking at purchasing displaceable tires and other things.
Often clubs have to set their entry fees before they even know how much all of the expenses will be for a trial and they have to guestimate what to charge based on previous events.
Annelise
Agile Canines
I look at entry fees for various trials around our area and in the midwest (when I travel to trials at other places). If I know who is putting on the trial I will ask them about their expenses because I'm always curious about that. I'm always "shopping" for places to have trials and for ways to keep the trial costs down so I don't have to pass it along to competitors. My goal for ACTS trials is to break-even. As a business and not a non-profit or not-for-profit club I have higher overhead than they do when putting on trials at some venues. While the facility rental fees we pay here in the Twin Cities are some of the highest in the country we still have some of the lowest entry fees in the country. Certainly some of the lowest entry fees for a large metropolitan area. How long that may last is hard to say because the rental fees and expenses are continuing to increase.
This past March trial we learned that the parking police at the U of M had recently stepped up their enforcement and I was really worried that they would ticket our competitors and cost everyone a $20-25 ticket. That would have been horrible. We had been avoiding paying for parking because no one had been checking. Well at the last minute I had to buy a "lot pass" for 50 cars at $6 per car per day from the U. I thought long and hard about how to handle this unexpected additional cost. I decided to pass it along to exhibitors at a discount of $5 per car. It turned out that on Saturday the parking enforcement counted cars and found 73 there and so they charged me for the additional 23 cars at $6 each - but better that than ticketing everyone. I did not quite collect enough money in parking fees to cover this cost. Smaller trials like the ASCA ones may get by with paying for fewer cars on a lot pass and they pay significantly less in rent than I do so they also may be able to "eat" the cost of the parking passes more than I can.
One thing I've learned is that the rental fees Agile Canines pays to Leatherdale and SoccerBlast are among the highest in the country. Agile Canines is a business, not a non-for-profit, so I have to pay more for weekend rental at Leatherdale than the ASCA or MAC do. This is a rule of the U of M to charge less for the clubs. Simons Arena and the Isanti barn are also higher in rent than other places around the country. These facilities do not provide equipment rental either. At Leatherdale I have to pay $500 a day compared to $300 that the clubs pay plus $6 per car for parking. For an average ACTS trial that is 75 cars (an additional $450 per day). SoccerBlast charges all groups the same - $1200 per day and parking is included. When I research other areas and the rent they pay it is often less than than $800 per day and often this fee will include equipment rental.
The other factor that goes into entry fees is the cost of ribbons. For CPE trials where we use 500 qualifying ribbons per trial that is a large additional expense.
When you look at your entry fee and where the money goes keep the following in mind:
Judges are paid $1.00 per run (some AKC judges are paid more than this) as long as the dog is listed in the catalog/running order regardless if they run or not.
Clubs pay on average $1.00 per run to the parent organization for recording fees (AKC and USDAA have higher rates and different fee scales)
Ribbons for double flats you can figure that the Q ribbon is around $.70 to $1.00 and the placements may be less. Rosettes run around $3.00 each.
Toys per dog are about $2.00 each.
For an ACTS Leatherdale trial that has 400 runs a day you can figure that $1.25 of your entry fee goes toward rent (not including parking)
Then there are the judge's expenses - airfare, hotel, meals and judging gift. This varies a great deal but very often airfare can be as high as $500 especially for judges living near smaller airports. Often judges can't fly out until Monday morning so there are three nights of a hotel stay. So you can figure that at least $1.00 per run goes toward judge's expenses.
Look at the break down of where an $11 entry goes:
$11 per run
- $1.00 judge fee
- $1.00 org recording fee
- $1.00 ribbon cost
- $.25 toy cost
- $1.25 rental fee (indoor venues or outdoor venues with porta-potty rentals)
- $1.00 judge expenses
- $1.00 for miscellaneous expenses such as sanctioning fees, trial secy' expenses for paper, ink, software updates, general office supplies for the trial, gas and truck rental.
- $.50 per run for worker lunch (when it is not a potluck - $.25 per run when it is a potluck)
Then when you consider that 25% of all entry fees for an ACTS trial come in the form of worker vouchers... that amounts to a further discount of $2.75 in cash per run.
- That leaves a $1.25 per run in cash to cover additional costs that may arise - like parking fees at Leatherdale, new title pins and other special awards, costs for equipment maintenance and purchase of new equipment. This is why I felt it was necessary to pass along the cost of parking at a discount to competitors otherwise I would have lost money on the trial.
So before you complain about entry fees increasing you need to look at how much it costs to put on a trial. There is not much money (and sometimes no money) being made at the ACTS trials so I really do it because I enjoy doing it and I feel I am supporting the various parent organizations by doing so.
For 2010 there have been rental fee increases announced by some of the places we use for trials as well as other expenses increasing. Do not be surprised if entry fees start to increase later this year and into 2010. You may also see groups cutting back on things in order to help cut costs.
Other expenses that many clubs incur - paying trial secretaries (can be thousands of dollars per trial), renting equipment and higher recording fees to their parent organization.
In addition with the changes and improvements made in equipment requirements for the different agility organizations it is expensive for agility groups to keep up with these when putting on trials. Many clubs in the area are updating their equipment and adding rubber granules to their contacts and looking at purchasing displaceable tires and other things.
Often clubs have to set their entry fees before they even know how much all of the expenses will be for a trial and they have to guestimate what to charge based on previous events.
Annelise
Agile Canines
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Course analysis - Challenger and Finals Rounds
Here is the link to the Challengers course:
http://www.akc.org/pdfs/national_agility_championship/2009/courses/Sun_NAC_Rd_4_Challengers.pdf
This was a technical course where handlers had to push to be fast and clean. Winning this class was necessary for a spot in the finals for those who did not make the original cut for finals. Up to 12 dogs in each jump height are eligible for this class, which is open to the top 4 dogs of each jump height from rounds 1 through 3, that have not already gaiined placement into the finals based on three rounds of cumulative scores, provided they scored 100 in that round. Two clean rounds are required to be in the Challenger's class.
So the pressure was on for this class. The opening with the 1-2-3 serpentine into the weaves went well for most handlers. Lead-outs proved a distinct advantage for this sequence. A few dogs knocked bars here or missed weave entries but most did fine. Then on to the panel and wrap to the aframe. Having fast aframe contacts made a huge difference in saving precious hundredths of seconds. Once again the teeter proved problematic for the smaller dogs with many of them bailing off of it. All of the teeters were provided by J&J and in my opinion these are very heavy teeters for small dogs. All weekend long the teeter was a problem for many experienced small dogs.
Most handlers of all size dogs did front crosses between 9 and 10 and 11 to 12. The well timed crosses had the tightest turns and again made a difference in this close fast competition. Some handlers were in a hurry to get the front cross in between 11 and 12 that they didn't support 10 well and got run-bys on 10. The wrap to the tire and tunnel entrance were not a problem for most dogs. There were a couple of dogs who got hung up in the tire. Then the ending produced two different handling strategies. The majority of the handlers did a front cross on the landing side of 16 and then ran with their dogs on the right to the finish. Several handlers kept their dogs on their left for 15-16-17 and rear crossed on the take-off side of 18.
The crowd started cheering while dogs were on the dogwalk which got dogs running faster and there were many missed dogwalk contacts on that finish. Most handlers are pushing and the dogs are running fast. A handful of handlers celebrated a little too early and the last bar came down.
It was really fun to watch handlers really running all out and going for broke.
The finals run was a very technical course with a few spots where handlers could push for speed. The opening sequence of 1-2-3-4 was challenging. A lead out was definitely needed but many dogs were pretty amped and pushing the start line stays a lot. I was seated with a perfect view of this part of the course and could see many dogs looking past the first jump to the tunnel under the dogwalk. But all the dogs took the correct jump but I think many worried their handlers. Handlers had to work the chute exit because it was hard for the dogs to see the jump coming out of the chute and if the dogs came out too much toward the handler they could incur a refusal on #4 jump. Then handlers sprinted from #4 to the #7 tunnel. Handlers wanted to hustle to get to the exit of the tunnel because it was very challenging section of the course.
The 8-9-10 proved to be the most difficult part of the entire course. Many, many small dogs took the off course tunnel instead of the dogwalk. The number of dogs taking the off course tunnel decreased as the jump heights increased but it was not a "gimmee" for anyone. Some handlers chose to keep their dogs on their right from the tunnel to #8 jump and rear crossed the take off side of 8 and then pulled their dogs to the dogwalk. Other handlers sprinted to the exit and did a front cross and sent the dogs over #8 off their left side. A small number of handlers did another front cross between 9 and 10 to try to push their dogs off their right sides on to the dogwalk. This worked for about half of the handlers who tried it. What I noticed was that handlers were not decelerating to get their dogs to collect and check-in for the dogwalk cue. Many handlers kept racing forward and relayed strictly on verbal cues and dogs blasted into the tunnel. Two dogs at the last second looked up and noticed their handler was almost to the end of the dogwalk and went up the walk when they looked committed to the tunnel. Handlers who did a full reverse flow pivot (RFP) often pushed their dogs into the tunnel when they came out of the rotation (main reason why I find this to be an ineffective technique for this kind of obstacle discrimination). Handlers who did a bit of a turn and hand cue had some success but they usually also stopped or hesitated long enough to get their dogs heads. Overall I was amazed at how this very common set-up caused so many problems for otherwise experienced dogs and handlers. I suspect many people will be going home and training this sequence.
The other part that caught some of the medium sized dog handlers and some 20" dog handlers was that the panel jump off the dogwalk was a bit of a push. Many run-bys occurred at this jump as handlers were racing to try to get crosses in by the aframe and to push for speed on this otherwise straightforward sequence. Some handlers did great front crosses between the tire and the aframe and others did them on the descent of the aframe. A few rear crossed the jump after the aframe. Almost every front crossed before the weave poles. A handful of dogs popped out of the last pole of the weaves as handlers started racing for the finish line.
The clean runs were very close in time for every jump height. But there were very few clean runs - it was a very challenging course when handlers are pushing for speed.
It was interesting that they had a judge assigned to just judge the down side of the dogwalk. It would have been a hard course for a judge to judge alone - not a great judging path because they would be in the handler's way and with fast dogs it would be hard to judge the downside of the dogwalk and then get over to the downside of the aframe without getting in the handler's way. I also suspect that with the increase in number of dogs doing running dogwalks it is getting harder and harder to judge the dogwalk and at a competition like this you want to be sure you are making a good call.
I also noticed, because I was seated up high, that most of the running dogwalk contacts work well for the 42" contact but would not work well in a 36" contact (USDAA). This is a problem that I've encountered and I know Stacy Peardot-Goudy and Dana Pike have experienced it as well. Having a consistent running contact under pressure is very difficult. Many handlers were releasing their 2on/2off early to save precious time and I could see many dogs were leaving the contacts higher and higher up as the weekend progressed. I believe there will be a lot of contact training going on in the next several weeks by folks who were at the nationals. This is why I really believe that nationals events are the place when releasing early can help you achieve some goals and can make a difference in time and makes the price to pay worthwhile. That price being some going back to contact foundation for several weeks/trials to pay for it. The stronger the initial foundation of 2on/2off the less the price will be. The longer you release early, the higher the price. Some dogs can evolve into modified running contacts with early releases but many others will get pushier and pushier about leaving the board earlier and earlier. Again which way a dog will go depends on the attitude of the dog, size of the dog, speed of the dog, degree of foundation training on contacts, degree of reinforcement in trial settings, amount of trialing and many other factors. The other thing is that having a running contact requires a handler to be present at the end of the contact to direct the dog which in the case of the finals most of the handlers were athletic enough to run every inch of the course with their dogs.
Watching competitions like this can be very inspiring and can be very educational in terms of watching handling styles and moves. I strongly recommend getting your hands on the videos of the finals because this was a very challenging course. Sometimes finals courses can be all about speed and not as technical. This one was technical and therefore very educational in terms of handling and training.
Annelise
http://www.akc.org/pdfs/national_agility_championship/2009/courses/Sun_NAC_Rd_4_Challengers.pdf
This was a technical course where handlers had to push to be fast and clean. Winning this class was necessary for a spot in the finals for those who did not make the original cut for finals. Up to 12 dogs in each jump height are eligible for this class, which is open to the top 4 dogs of each jump height from rounds 1 through 3, that have not already gaiined placement into the finals based on three rounds of cumulative scores, provided they scored 100 in that round. Two clean rounds are required to be in the Challenger's class.
So the pressure was on for this class. The opening with the 1-2-3 serpentine into the weaves went well for most handlers. Lead-outs proved a distinct advantage for this sequence. A few dogs knocked bars here or missed weave entries but most did fine. Then on to the panel and wrap to the aframe. Having fast aframe contacts made a huge difference in saving precious hundredths of seconds. Once again the teeter proved problematic for the smaller dogs with many of them bailing off of it. All of the teeters were provided by J&J and in my opinion these are very heavy teeters for small dogs. All weekend long the teeter was a problem for many experienced small dogs.
Most handlers of all size dogs did front crosses between 9 and 10 and 11 to 12. The well timed crosses had the tightest turns and again made a difference in this close fast competition. Some handlers were in a hurry to get the front cross in between 11 and 12 that they didn't support 10 well and got run-bys on 10. The wrap to the tire and tunnel entrance were not a problem for most dogs. There were a couple of dogs who got hung up in the tire. Then the ending produced two different handling strategies. The majority of the handlers did a front cross on the landing side of 16 and then ran with their dogs on the right to the finish. Several handlers kept their dogs on their left for 15-16-17 and rear crossed on the take-off side of 18.
The crowd started cheering while dogs were on the dogwalk which got dogs running faster and there were many missed dogwalk contacts on that finish. Most handlers are pushing and the dogs are running fast. A handful of handlers celebrated a little too early and the last bar came down.
It was really fun to watch handlers really running all out and going for broke.
The finals run was a very technical course with a few spots where handlers could push for speed. The opening sequence of 1-2-3-4 was challenging. A lead out was definitely needed but many dogs were pretty amped and pushing the start line stays a lot. I was seated with a perfect view of this part of the course and could see many dogs looking past the first jump to the tunnel under the dogwalk. But all the dogs took the correct jump but I think many worried their handlers. Handlers had to work the chute exit because it was hard for the dogs to see the jump coming out of the chute and if the dogs came out too much toward the handler they could incur a refusal on #4 jump. Then handlers sprinted from #4 to the #7 tunnel. Handlers wanted to hustle to get to the exit of the tunnel because it was very challenging section of the course.
The 8-9-10 proved to be the most difficult part of the entire course. Many, many small dogs took the off course tunnel instead of the dogwalk. The number of dogs taking the off course tunnel decreased as the jump heights increased but it was not a "gimmee" for anyone. Some handlers chose to keep their dogs on their right from the tunnel to #8 jump and rear crossed the take off side of 8 and then pulled their dogs to the dogwalk. Other handlers sprinted to the exit and did a front cross and sent the dogs over #8 off their left side. A small number of handlers did another front cross between 9 and 10 to try to push their dogs off their right sides on to the dogwalk. This worked for about half of the handlers who tried it. What I noticed was that handlers were not decelerating to get their dogs to collect and check-in for the dogwalk cue. Many handlers kept racing forward and relayed strictly on verbal cues and dogs blasted into the tunnel. Two dogs at the last second looked up and noticed their handler was almost to the end of the dogwalk and went up the walk when they looked committed to the tunnel. Handlers who did a full reverse flow pivot (RFP) often pushed their dogs into the tunnel when they came out of the rotation (main reason why I find this to be an ineffective technique for this kind of obstacle discrimination). Handlers who did a bit of a turn and hand cue had some success but they usually also stopped or hesitated long enough to get their dogs heads. Overall I was amazed at how this very common set-up caused so many problems for otherwise experienced dogs and handlers. I suspect many people will be going home and training this sequence.
The other part that caught some of the medium sized dog handlers and some 20" dog handlers was that the panel jump off the dogwalk was a bit of a push. Many run-bys occurred at this jump as handlers were racing to try to get crosses in by the aframe and to push for speed on this otherwise straightforward sequence. Some handlers did great front crosses between the tire and the aframe and others did them on the descent of the aframe. A few rear crossed the jump after the aframe. Almost every front crossed before the weave poles. A handful of dogs popped out of the last pole of the weaves as handlers started racing for the finish line.
The clean runs were very close in time for every jump height. But there were very few clean runs - it was a very challenging course when handlers are pushing for speed.
It was interesting that they had a judge assigned to just judge the down side of the dogwalk. It would have been a hard course for a judge to judge alone - not a great judging path because they would be in the handler's way and with fast dogs it would be hard to judge the downside of the dogwalk and then get over to the downside of the aframe without getting in the handler's way. I also suspect that with the increase in number of dogs doing running dogwalks it is getting harder and harder to judge the dogwalk and at a competition like this you want to be sure you are making a good call.
I also noticed, because I was seated up high, that most of the running dogwalk contacts work well for the 42" contact but would not work well in a 36" contact (USDAA). This is a problem that I've encountered and I know Stacy Peardot-Goudy and Dana Pike have experienced it as well. Having a consistent running contact under pressure is very difficult. Many handlers were releasing their 2on/2off early to save precious time and I could see many dogs were leaving the contacts higher and higher up as the weekend progressed. I believe there will be a lot of contact training going on in the next several weeks by folks who were at the nationals. This is why I really believe that nationals events are the place when releasing early can help you achieve some goals and can make a difference in time and makes the price to pay worthwhile. That price being some going back to contact foundation for several weeks/trials to pay for it. The stronger the initial foundation of 2on/2off the less the price will be. The longer you release early, the higher the price. Some dogs can evolve into modified running contacts with early releases but many others will get pushier and pushier about leaving the board earlier and earlier. Again which way a dog will go depends on the attitude of the dog, size of the dog, speed of the dog, degree of foundation training on contacts, degree of reinforcement in trial settings, amount of trialing and many other factors. The other thing is that having a running contact requires a handler to be present at the end of the contact to direct the dog which in the case of the finals most of the handlers were athletic enough to run every inch of the course with their dogs.
Watching competitions like this can be very inspiring and can be very educational in terms of watching handling styles and moves. I strongly recommend getting your hands on the videos of the finals because this was a very challenging course. Sometimes finals courses can be all about speed and not as technical. This one was technical and therefore very educational in terms of handling and training.
Annelise
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)