# Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hunter



## Dannyboy (Oct 27, 2010)

I just got a 1 year old golden and am debating training her for bird retrieval. Anyone have some good tips on training at home? I think the dog has the ability as long as i have the patients. But have never trained a dog for hunting before and am at alittle bit of a loss on how to begin. Well any advice would be helpful, Thanks :?


----------



## Gumbo (Sep 22, 2007)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

http://www.rushcreekpress.com


----------



## MarkM (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Another good one

http://www.amazon.com/10-Minute-Retriev ... 1572233036

Mark


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

unless your are running field trials or want train a master hunter dog i wouldnt suggest the Smartworks books. there is a lot of stuff in there that isnt neccessary if you just want a great gun dog and not compete with the dog. not all dogs can handle the pressure that is associated with that program, and programs like it. you dont need to go to that extreme for a top notch gun dog, you just dont. if you want a great meat dog go this route, http://www.sprigkennelsandsupply.com/ga ... a-wolters/ i trained my very first lab years ago to his akc master hunter title with this book and many other hunt test dogs since then. it is basic, easy to read and it works. people give him a hard time for whatever reason i dont know, his method is easy and effecitve. i have many hunt test certificates on my wall that will back that up.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Mar 9, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Sprig Kennels said:


> unless your are running field trials or want train a master hunter dog i wouldnt suggest the Smartworks books. there is a lot of stuff in there that isnt neccessary if you just want a great gun dog and not compete with the dog. not all dogs can handle the pressure that is associated with that program, and programs like it. you dont need to go to that extreme for a top notch gun dog, you just dont. if you want a great meat dog go this route, http://www.sprigkennelsandsupply.com/ga ... a-wolters/ i trained my very first lab years ago to his akc master hunter title with this book and many other hunt test dogs since then. it is basic, easy to read and it works. people give him a hard time for whatever reason i dont know, his method is easy and effecitve. i have many hunt test certificates on my wall that will back that up.


I agree Jeff that this book can be used with some success but there also is much better material out there. It's not so much the method you use but how you use it. I read Game Dog and Water dog years ago but mostly used the Tri Tronics book by Jim Dobbs when I started out and then learned by experience and from other poeple that knew more than me. I am a hands on kinda guy and learn much better that way. At this point if I were to start over good ol Richard Wolters stuff would be the last thing I would use. Again not saying it wont work just that there is a ton fo better stuff out there.
Dannyboy if you are interested and really want to learn you would be welcome to come train with me sometime. I would be happy to help put you on the right track but I gotta tell ya your kinda handicapped with a golden   Jes kiddin. I have worked with a couple very nice goldens and have seen many more.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> It's not so much the method you use but how you use it.


Steve, you are 100% correct and there is A LOT of truth with that statement,

however, many of the programs today, smartworks, lardy's, etc....are very very involved and not really suited for the average guy wanting just a good gun dog. That is why i rarely promote these programs because from what i have seen, they aint being used properly by the novice trainer and in the wrong hands, programs such as these that rely on high levels of pressure can and will ruin a dog faster than just about anything when things go wrong with the training and the novice trainer panics.

There is a lot of stuff that can be taken out of them that isnt necessary unless you want a competitive dog running retriever games. if you just want a great "get the bird dog" there are other methods like Wolters that rely more upon the dogs instincts and less on pressure that are more "user friendly".

Nothing againts these high pressure methods, i have the lardy tapes and love watching them and have learned from them but they are what they are, great training programs for high level dogs and trainers wanting to compete or go to the master national. Not all dogs can handle the pressure and not all trainers can properly use the high pressure. They are not geared for the gun dog owner just wanting to hunt.


----------



## Dannyboy (Oct 27, 2010)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Thanks everyone for the tips. I will have to look into some of these options and see what i think will work best for my dog and me. I probably will be looking a few of you up when i start to get a handle on this for some move advise and maybe bring my dog out and see how you guys do it.


----------



## Pintail Retrievers (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Everyone has their opinions which are based upon their successes and Steve and Sprig have had success in the dog games/hunting dogs for sure so the input here is definitely valuable.

Now for my 2 cents   In my study of the modern training programs I would highly recommend Fowl Dawgs (this is my success tool) by Rick Stawksi, especially for the beginner who wants a hunting dog. His first DVD is inexpensive, you can buy it at Sportsmans and the format is straight forward and easy to follow and with dedication will produce a decent dog in the blind. Evans program is well worth the money, but I personally feel the way Rick outlines his program is better for the beginner, gives better straight forward direction. I have read Richard Wolters book and do agree it is great material, but do feel it is misleading with time frames. Can't speak on the Tri-Tronics book, I have never touched it. I think all the programs were made with the beginner in mind, but I would just suggest staying with one program once you start, you will have more success and less confusion then bouncing around from one to the other.

Most importantly, just have fun!!

Kory


----------



## Steve Shaver (Mar 9, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Sprig Kennels said:


> unless your are running field trials or want train a master hunter dog i wouldnt suggest the Smartworks books. there is a lot of stuff in there that isnt neccessary if you just want a great gun dog and not compete with the dog. not all dogs can handle the pressure that is associated with that program, and programs like it. you dont need to go to that extreme for a top notch gun dog, you just dont. if you want a great meat dog go this route, http://www.sprigkennelsandsupply.com/ga ... a-wolters/ i trained my very first lab years ago to his akc master hunter title with this book and many other hunt test dogs since then. it is basic, easy to read and it works. people give him a hard time for whatever reason i dont know, his method is easy and effecitve. i have many hunt test certificates on my wall that will back that up.


Sorry I just dont understand the attitude of I just want a good gun dog so all that stuff isnt necessary.
If you can drive a Cadillac why settle for a Volkswagon. I realize not everybody has the time or ability to train their dog to be the best they can be but I for one want my dog to live up to his potential. I train every dog the same be it gun dog or top of the line competitor, especially in the begining. I just may not take the gun dog as far but the method remains the same. 
Yes you can train an adequate gun dog using good ol Richards books but the newer material has expanded and refined all that he did and then some. As for them being pressure oriented I dont see it that way. I follow the more modern methods but I consider myself a very low pressure trainer. Sure there is some pressure involved but to me a dog that understands the pressure of negative enforcement will learn better and faster. I'm not saying beat them with a 2x 4 or fry them with the collar but a little slap on the butt with a heeling stick or nick with the collar will make things more black and white for the dog so they understand better and can move on quicker. Any dog can be taught to deal with pressure and will be better for it. Pressure can be as heavy or subtle as you want it. Used in subtle ways it is a very valuable tool in training a dog no matter what you use it for.
Bottom line is to decide what you want out of your dog and use any tool or material you are comfortable with and stick with it and have fun. Personally I dont learn well from books. I did VERY litte reading when I started and have learned from hands on experience and watching others with experience. I dont even think I read one book all they way through and I also have plenty of hunt test certificates.
There is definitely more than one way to skin a cat.To me it's more of an understanding of the animals your working with than the methods you use

PS I have noit seen the Stawski material but Kory gives some good advice. He's not as stupid as he looks :lol:


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> Sprig Kennels":1lq9yiq3]unless your are running field trials or want train a master hunter dog i wouldnt suggest the Smartworks books. there is a lot of stuff in there that isnt neccessary if you just want a great gun dog and not compete with the dog. not all dogs can handle the pressure that is associated with that program said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.sprigkennelsandsupply.com/ga ... a-wolters/[/URL] i trained my very first lab years ago to his akc master hunter title with this book and many other hunt test dogs since then. it is basic, easy to read and it works. people give him a hard time for whatever reason i dont know, his method is easy and effecitve. i have many hunt test certificates on my wall that will back that up.
> ...


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> Sorry I just dont understand the attitude of I just want a good gun dog so all that stuff isnt necessary.
> If you can drive a Cadillac why settle for a Volkswagon.


i can see this going back to the age old argument of retriever games vs. meat dogs......
o-|| 
I am going to say this as a continuing advocate and supporter for retriever games for almost 18 years, but in all truthfulness, all i will say is when these games start testing for a Cadillac dog and those training methods train a Cadillac dog i will agree with you but unfortunately, they dont and probably never will. *A Cadillac dog isnt just a dog that can mark and handle for retrieves but one that is a step higher*, one that can hunt waterfowl AND upland game, BOTH at the same high level. Why settle for just a marking dog when you can have a dog that tracks wounded game as well. I dont mean a dog that just smells a downed bird when it gets into the "fall area" but a dog that can track a wounded, running bird for considerable distances in some very heavy cover. True, Richard Wolters methods dont train for 300 yard marks or shoreline blinds, but those things arent the sole defining factors of a Cadillac dog. AKC has beaten into our heads marking and handling and style...but leaves out one of the most important aspects of a bird dog, its nose. AKC retriever games dont and probably never will test and reward for this. NAHRA does, which was started by Wolters, among others, by the way.

This also goes back to the age old argument of the necessity of these training methods for hunting. Just as you can show me 1,000's of scenarios where a dog that can swim 4 feet down a bank for 100 yards is the better way, i can show you the same, 1,000's of scenarios where it isnt and a dog that thinks on its feet and finds a better way to the bird is better/faster. one thing i think these games has done is taken the "thinking" away from our dogs, their natural hunting instincts and ability to reason and work out a problem. Sure, training a dog to do such a feat such as a 100 yard shoreline blind would lead a higher level of "training" by human standards i guess but that doesnt mean it is a better hunting dog. I have seen many many dogs with very little training out hunt and retrieve dogs that had the "training" in a lot of day to day real world hunting scenarios. you shoot a bird that sails and falls 50 yards deep into 6 foot high cattails and all the precison "marking and handling" in the world aint worht squat when you cant see the dog and it has to rely on it's instincts and nose, both of which aint tested for, trained for or rewarded for in our current AKC system. Hunting is a natural instinct and a lot of what we do with our dogs today with many of these so called advanced methods goes againts natural instinct of the dog.



Steve Shaver said:


> As for them being pressure oriented I dont see it that way.


you dont see force fetch, force fetch with a collar, stick fetch, force to a pile, force to sit, force to a crate, and all the other force techniques and drills pressure oriented? The whole system is based on pressure and turning the pressure off. these are the things were people make the mistakes by cutting corners or not fully implementing them or panic when something goes wrong that ruin dogs and arent necessary for a great bird dog. out of all the force techniques, force fetch is really the only real needed one and that aint even needed with every dog too. I see way too many slow, drooped tails, popping and hardmouth dogs as well as other issues at hunt tests that only come from the wrong use of these pressure methods. that is why i say it aint neccesary. too many risks of ruining a dog when things go wrong in training, and it will with all methods, wolters or lardy's, for example, but wolters is A LOT more forgiving to the new or inexperienced handler. I have personally seen, in watching others train their dogs with these methods, situations where the dog didnt understand the concept but the person just kept pouring on the pressure hoping the dog will eventually do the right thing because the word "pressure" was drilled into their heads over and over on a DVD or from a book.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> Any dog can be taught to deal with pressure and will be better for it. Pressure can be as heavy or subtle as you want it. Used in subtle ways it is a very valuable tool in training a dog no matter what you use it for.


True, any dog can be taught to deal with pressure BUT not all dogs can handle the same level of pressure and that is the BIGGEST problem with the pressure methods, people dont understand this fact and think all dogs are the same and will respond in the same way to pressure. Even when these methods do mention this fact, there is also the problem of implementing it and reading a dogs response to the pressure given and adjusting up or down to get the correct response. In a pressure program, too little pressure can be just as damaging as too much pressure because the dog isnt getting enough pressure to change its behavior but it keeps getting corrected over and over and over and over. this is why i am not a big fan of pressure methods, you have to match the correct level of pressure with the dog and that can be hard to do when an inexperienced trainer has only trained a couple of dogs in his/her life and hasnt seen how many dogs can and do respond to pressure. too much risk for mistakes that isnt necessary.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Mar 9, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Well Jeff, you just dont get it do ya? You would think with all your 18 years of experience (last year it was 16) you would understand the value of the modern training methods. I'm not going to go through the last book er ahh post you wrote and present the counter point because quite frankly, what's the point. -O\__- You'll just write another book err ahhh post about your vast experience and opinions. Poor ol Dannyboy was just looking for a little help and you go turn it into the dog games vs hunting thing. 
I will comment about a couple things though. You make out the pressure oriented systems to be evil and unecessary when in reality it is pretty simple and actually helps the dog learn quicker with less nagging. Just because the word force is used doesnt make it a bad thing. I can understand someone that is new to dog training might be intimidated by the force method simply because they dont understand it but I find it a little strange coming from someone of your vast experience. In fact very little force is necessary. You should try it sometime you might just like how it works. But no you stick with good ol Richards book written in 1983. Not knockin it just saying things have been refined in the last 30 years.
You go on and on about great huntin dogs being able to trail a wounded pheasant I say big deal thats something that most dogs will learn to do naturally with a little experience. To prove that to myself yesterday I took a frozen duck out of the freezer, I mean this duck was froze solid. Also scenting conditions werent all that great either. Anyways to get to the point I laid a trail with it for about 80 yards. Then I go and get my 3 1/2 year old field trial dog, everybody knows field trial dogs cant hunt. I put her on the spot where I started and told her to find the bird. She had it in her mouth in less than 2 minutes. This is my compitition dog who has never hunted a day in her life but I'd put her up against any gun dog you've trained. So you see just because they dont test for it in the dog games doesnt mean a dog wont do it.
So Jeff if you want ot argue anymore about field trial vs hunt test vs gun dog start another thread and leave poor ol Dannyboys thread alone.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Steve, All I did was exactly what you did, VOICE MY OPINION. It seems that when you do that it is ok because your training methods are the only ones that work but each and every time i voice my opinion on what works i get made out to be some bad guy because i dont field trial my dogs or use the "latest and greatest" methods. My whole point of the post was, and still is, you DON'T NEED THOSE METHODS TO MAKE A GREAT BIRD DOG but for some reason you cant let an opinion that isn't field trial oriented get posted without rebutal.

You say big deal to a dog that can track a wounded bird? That is incredible coming from someone that has your experience. a dogs nose and tracking ability is very very important in all types of bird hunting and if you think most dogs will learn it naturally you need to get out and see a few more dogs because it doesnt come naturally, it has to be trained for just like any other type of skill a bird dog needs. I am not talking about a dog that marks an area and runs around until it stumbles on the bird or gets down wind of it and then finds it, i am talking about a dog that can track a bird that is running for long distances and that dont come naturally at all. and dragging a dead stinking bird on the ground, along with the human scent that comes from the person dragging it isnt the same thing either but what the heck do i know, i just got home from pheasant hunting where my dogs tracked 2 runninng roosters for 300 yards in wet sloppy heavy fragmites, something any dog can do....NOT!!!!! It was trained for and very few dogs can and do have this abiltiy because they havent been trained for it, heck not every lab even has that ability because they arent bred for it as it is as much inherited as anything, just like a good marking dog is.

I am not intimidated by force at all. I force fetch my dogs and use and e-collar too but i dont use all the force drills that are talked about in these methods because they aint necessary. I brought Wolters because it works and is easier to use and leads to less mistakes by the new trainer that might not want to have a dog run 3 feet off the shore for whatever reason. you go to any trial or test and see a dog that is droopy, slow, tail down or pops, or no goes and i will GUARANTEE you that dog was the result of someone using a high pressure method and didnt fully understand it, cut corners or kept switching programs or just crashed and burned with it with too much pressure on the dog...i will also GUARANTEE you you wont see a dog like that using wolters method......As a judge, i HATE to see dogs run like that in a test and they only come from on place, TOO MUCH PRESSURE!!!!!!!!

one last thing, you think your dog, just because it can follow a dead frozen bird dragged on the ground can keep up with a real tracking dog, come and run your field trial dog with my junior hunter titled dogs and you will see what i am talking about, they will school your dog on tracking and dont say tracking isnt important because it is just as important in waterfowl as it is in pheasants. Running a 300 yard blind down a shoreline is cool, dont get me wrong, it is impressive from a training standpoint, BUT there is more to a bird dog than just that and a dog that can fully utilize its nose is just as valuable, more so in many situations, like for example those times when you cant see your dog because of the 7 foot high fragmite (like at ogden bay) and you have to rely on just the dogs nose and traking ability to find a downed bird.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> Well Jeff, you just dont get it do ya? You would think with all your 18 years of experience (last year it was 16)


I said it is coming up on 18 years, last year was 16, this year was 17, next year is etc.....why is it you have to attack every little thing i say like this? yes, i have been around a long time and what is wrong that? I am very proud of what i have done with bird dogs, from akc hunt tests, judging, hunting, dog training demo's, my successful business, guided youth hunts, my labs, pointing dogs, all of it because i have worked **** hard at it and I take it seriously and if that bothers you, I dont know what to tell ya because bird dogs is what i am about and what i do and I am **** proud of that and its why i have been successful at it.

It seems that every thing i say you just want to jump on it because i dont run field trials or subscribe to all of their training methods.....I don't use a training method just because i read it in a book or saw it on a DVD, the training methods i use are ones that i have honed and worked on for many many years. i have taken stuff from several places, even from FT such as lardy, developed my own stuff, and implemented it into my program and it will continue to evolve. I will also say it is largely based on richard wolters program and will always be that way but i have tweaked it through the years and will continue to do so as needed *but, as the original intent of my post*, his methods might be old but they still work today and will continue to work in the future. I am staring at a AKC master hunter title on my wall that was achieved with mostly his method and no e-collar, so yes, they did work back then and they still work now, That is my point i was trying to make!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Steve Shaver (Mar 9, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Whatever Jeff! You didnt understand a word I said :roll: Your the one that thinks your way is the THE way it should be done. If you would go back to the begining I didnt disagree with you I simply pointed out that there is more info in the world of dog training than Wolters book and I never said a dog using his nose to track a bird wasnt important. I also wasnt comparing my dog doing an 80 yd track of a frozen practically scent less bird to your 300 yd track through the worst imaginable conditions. I was just pointing out that the dog WILL follow a trail naturally. I had never attempted that with the dog and she did fine, obviously training and experience would enhance that NATURAL ability. I'm not going to argue with you anymore cuz you wont listen and cant hear whats being said anyway. So you win mister dog trainer 8) I bow down to your greatness. :roll: I dont understand why you get so defensive to everything I say.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> I also wasnt comparing my dog doing an 80 yd track of a frozen practically scent less bird to your 300 yd track through the worst imaginable conditions. I was just pointing out that the dog WILL follow a trail naturally.


Actually you did make it sound like any dog can track a bird...and you did compare your dog to mine by calling me out and saying you'd "put her up againts any gun dog I have trained".



Steve Shaver said:


> You go on and on about great huntin dogs being able to trail a wounded pheasant I say *big deal thats something that most dogs will learn to do naturally* with a little experience. To prove that to myself yesterday I took a frozen duck out of the freezer, I mean this duck was froze solid. Also scenting conditions werent all that great either. Anyways to get to the point I laid a trail with it for about 80 yards. Then I go and get my 3 1/2 year old field trial dog, everybody knows field trial dogs cant hunt. I put her on the spot where I started and told her to find the bird. She had it in her mouth in less than 2 minutes. *This is my compitition dog who has never hunted a day in her life but I'd put her up against any gun dog you've trained.*


so which is it?



Steve Shaver said:


> Your the one that thinks your way is the THE way it should be done.


what i said was, you dont need to use those high pressure methods to train a great bird dog, I didnt say they didnt work but i will say they have their place and time and not for everybody. I didnt say richard wolters was the only way. I said it is the method i used and i have had a lot of success with. I never said any other gun dog method wont work. Stop putting words in my mouth!! I said those high pressure methods arent necessary for a bird dog. I said they can lead to a lot of mistakes in the wrong hands. I have seen proof of it at many hunt tests and picnic tests. if you want to train a dog for 300 yard shoreline blinds, yes, they do work for that and for competitive dogs BUT once again, i said you dont need them to train a great bird dog and I stand by that statement. you have this notion that i am against field trials or their training methods, i am not at all. I will, however, say that those methods arent for everybody and all dogs, that was what I was saying. if you want proof, go to any field trial or hunt test and i am sure you will find at least one dog that has been trained with too much pressure...i.e. slow, tail between the legs, pops, no goes, etc....all symptoms of too much pressure in the wrong hands.

Me get defensive? read your own posts. from day one you have had it in for me because i dont subscribe to field trial training for a gun dog. every single thing i say you have to attack and say the exact opposite. If a person isnt a field trialer, they arent anybody, that is what i get from you and this holier than thou attitude you have shown me on almost every post.


----------



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Do I need to put you two in time-out? You guys crack me up... I honestly have not read all of this but have a couple quick comments.

In regards to the original post about training material for the maybe the basic gundog, Evan Graham has a newer DVD called Gundog Essentials. It may be a good one for someone just wanting a basic gundog.

Now a few other thoughts. Most average hunters, unless you have been involved in competetive retriever games, such as hunt tests or field trials, have no clue what these amazing animals are really capable of. The more advanced training programs will help you get that out of them. They help teach advanced skills the develop the retriever. Most average hunters without a lot of gundog experience are pretty satisfied if there dog doesn't see a bird fall, they can just throw a rock or shotgun shell in the area and get the dog over there to hunt it up. About any gundog training program can get you that.

The other thing that I saw posted or at least eluded to was that certain programs are based heavily around high pressure that most dogs can't take and they ruin more dogs than not. I am assuming that these suggested programs were ones like Lardy or Graham. If I am understanding that correctly, and you are saying that those two programs are just high pressure programs that mos tdogs can't take, then I really strongly disagree with perception and it is wrong. Either program of those two, if done and followed correctly and consistently, will do an excellent job of bringing the most out of your retriever and will create a happy hard working advanced successful very capable hunting companion and beyond if desired.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



tshuntin said:


> Do I need to put you two in time-out? You guys crack me up..


We'll be nice. :O•-: :mrgreen:



tshuntin said:


> In regards to the original post about training material for the maybe the basic gundog, Evan Graham has a newer DVD called Gundog Essentials. It may be a good one for someone just wanting a basic gundog.


 I would also throw in there Duck dog Basics with Chris Akin.....that is a good dvd, straightforward and to the point.



tshuntin said:


> Now a few other thoughts. Most average hunters, unless you have been involved in competetive retriever games, such as hunt tests or field trials, have no clue what these amazing animals are really capable of. The more advanced training programs will help you get that out of them. They help teach advanced skills the develop the retriever. Most average hunters without a lot of gundog experience are pretty satisfied if there dog doesn't see a bird fall, they can just throw a rock or shotgun shell in the area and get the dog over there to hunt it up. About any gundog training program can get you that.


That is actually my point about all of this. People who really havent had much experience with gun dogs and havent seen what they can do really shouldnt try and tackle training methods that rely more upon higher pressure right out of the gate with their first dog and they dont need those methods for a great bird dog. I heard it at sportsmans all the flippin time and i have seen it at picnic tests and in training with others, people get a piece or two of info from these systems and run with it, not fully understanding the background training that goes behind it and cause huge problems with their dogs because they didnt understand pressure and how dogs respond to it, and 99.999% of the time it comes with an e-collar. nothing againts e-collars, i use them daily too, but they make it taht much easier to make a mistake in correction as well as making a correct correction on the dog.



tshuntin said:


> The other thing that I saw posted or at least eluded to was that certain programs are based heavily around high pressure that most dogs can't take and they ruin more dogs than not. I am assuming that these suggested programs were ones like Lardy or Graham. If I am understanding that correctly, and you are saying that those two programs are just high pressure programs that mos tdogs can't take, then I really strongly disagree with perception and it is wrong. Either program of those two, if done and followed correctly and consistently, will do an excellent job of bringing the most out of your retriever and will create a happy hard working advanced successful very capable hunting companion and beyond if desired.


that isnt what i was eluding to. I will say that every dog responds to pressure differently and you have to find the right amount of pressure for any given dog, this is where the problems arise. for example, handler A sees handler B use "X" amount of pressure on his dog so he tries the same and the dog cant handle it and it starts to pop, or no goes or bolts,etc.... Its not that I dont think all dogs cant take pressure, every single training program that issues correction has some form of pressure in it with corrections, What i want to stress is this, not all dogs can take the same level of pressure. That is why i suggested a lower pressure method at the original point of this thread, more dogs can handle a program based on less pressure and will open the door to the chance of less mistakes by a inexperienced handler. For example, you dont need to collar force fetch and force to a pile to get a super gun dog that will handle, do multiple marks and everything needed for a great bird dog. You can get a finished gun dog without these methods actually. Nothing againts them, but like i said before, they have their time and place and are more for competitive dogs that are needing the more "precision" work, like swim down a bank 3 feet off the shore.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Mar 9, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Jeff, I guess I just have a hard time getting my point across and you have a hard time understanding it and vice versa.
You keep eluding to these training methods as HIGH pressure methods, they are not! Just because they have pressure involved doesnt mean they are HIGH pressure. Going back to the begining of this I said it's not the method but how you use it, and you agreed. Maybe you dont need the whole program to make a good gun dog but they will make you a BETTER gundog over using Wolters stuff.
To me the way you talk about these methods you sound just like the people you describe in your last post. If you see people screwing their dogs up all the time trying using these methods why not try to educate people on more advanced methods rather than saying Wolters stuff is all you need? Again NOTHING against his book but there is just better stuff out there. 
Give new people like Dannyboy a little more credit to have the smarts to use the methods correctly rather than advise them to stay away from them. Again I use the newer methods with an extremely low amount of pressure, infact I would probably use the same amount of pressure going strickly by Wolters book. It would just be a different kind of pressure.


----------



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Sprig Kennels said:


> [That is actually my point about all of this. People who really havent had much experience with gun dogs and havent seen what they can do really shouldnt try and tackle training methods that rely more upon higher pressure right out of the gate with their first dog and they dont need those methods for a great bird dog. I heard it at sportsmans all the flippin time and i have seen it at picnic tests and in training with others, people get a piece or two of info from these systems and run with it, not fully understanding the background training that goes behind it and cause huge problems with their dogs because they didnt understand pressure and how dogs respond to it, and 99.999% of the time it comes with an e-collar. nothing againts e-collars, i use them daily too, but they make it taht much easier to make a mistake in correction as well as making a correct correction on the dog.


My point was totally missed or I didn't describe it or defend it very well. Sorry. It doesn't matter if people haven't had a ton of experience or not in trying to tackle any training program. First of all, if you follow Lardy or Graham, they are not built around using high pressure. If you think they are, you are no correct and you obviously have not studied them. If people are only taking "a piece or two of info (or ten for that matter) and running with it", they are not following the program. That would be like teaching someone to drive a car by only teaching them how to steer the wheel, but notuse the gas or brakes, not turning the ignition on or off, or anything else. Someone could use Waterdog and only use a piece or two of it and could ruin their dog just as easy with that as only using a piece or two of another program. That is NOT following a program. That is the exact opposite. If you watched Lardy's or Graham's collar conditioning video's or really read or watched their programs, you would have a different opinion than you do specifically about those two programs. Following a part of a program is not the same as studying the program and following it thoroughly. These more modern and much more thorough and effective training programs that are available today, use different steps and processes than some of the older programs. They work on building blocks. You will work on something today that will make something 4 steps later much more easier and much more effective. The Blocks build on each other. It is not a randon group of skill sets that just teach that specific skill, it is a fully developed program that builds a dog and brings out the most in that dog.

Sprig, if you want, with your next pup, I would be glad to borrow you my entire set of Graham stuff and let you train your dog with it. Do it as a test. Keep two pups, train one with your current program (that you have had success with), and then train one using strictly and thoroughly Graham's program. I promise you your dog will be more thoroughly trained (quicker, happier, more effective, more advanced, more solid) by following the Smartwork program than the other one. This is not meant as a knock to you as a atrainer, actually just the opposite. You are already a good trainer and understand certain techniques, etc.. Having your experience and fitting and molding it into newer more advanced, effective, and I will say a much better program, will only take you to the next level as a a trainer. The different success you could have could be scary good! Again, this is not a knock to what you do now, as you have trained a lot of dogs, but major next level buddy is possible for sure!!


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> Jeff, I guess I just have a hard time getting my point across and you have a hard time understanding it and vice versa.


I understand your point, I just dont necessarily agree with it.



Steve Shaver said:


> You keep eluding to these training methods as HIGH pressure methods, they are not! Just because they have pressure involved doesnt mean they are HIGH pressure.


You dont consider, FF, collar fetch, force to pile, force into water, force to crate, de-bolting, force to sit, and all the other techniques used, mostly with an e-collar, high pressure? they are totally based on pressure and the dog learning to correct response and turning off the pressure, that is what i am referring to as high pressure, where the dog goes through an intense program to "turn off the collar". For example, one of the techniques used is to force the dog with an e-collar to sit, applyiing prressure with the collar until the dog sits and learning how to turn the pressure off. that is high presure and is not needed, in my opinion, to get a finished gun dog or even a master hunter or even more out of a dog. this is my whole point, not fully understanding how the dog thinks and reacts to this pressure can lead to problems, and we all have seen dogs that have cracked under this presure. and once again, not all dogs react to pressure and the same level of pressure the same way.



Steve Shaver said:


> Going back to the begining of this I said it's not the method but how you use it, and you agreed. Maybe you dont need the whole program to make a good gun dog but they will make you a BETTER gundog over using Wolters stuff.


yes, i do agree with it. BUT its the "how you use it" is what i have issues with, not the methods. higher pressure leads to more mistakes if not done correctly.



Steve Shaver said:


> To me the way you talk about these methods you sound just like the people you describe in your last post. If you see people screwing their dogs up all the time trying using these methods why not try to educate people on more advanced methods rather than saying Wolters stuff is all you need? Again NOTHING against his book but there is just better stuff out there.


I did, I spent almost 4 years at Sportmans Warehouse listening to people and how they train thier dogs, i have seen it at picnic tests and in training groups with some very well known people, names i wont mention. I have seen it for many years and dont like what i see when people use it the wrong way and the dog suffers, because time and time again when something goes wrong in training the person applies more presure thinking that will fix things or the dog justs needs a "correction" for screwing up and not realizing the dog wasnt prepared the right way and didnt understand and got corrected unfairly and started more issues, a downward cycle.



Steve Shaver said:


> Again I use the newer methods with an extremely low amount of pressure, infact I would probably use the same amount of pressure going strickly by Wolters book. It would just be a different kind of pressure.


ok, i want to hear your version of pressure. what is different about it?
did you collar fetch? force to pile? force to sit, etc, etc.? maybe this is where we are getting lost with each others sides of the arguement.

Basicly, you could probably reduce all the training programs out there down to 2 basic forms, pressure and avoidance. now like i said before, all programs have pressure in them to some degree that have any amount of correction in them but there is a basic fundamental difference between the 2. Pressure involves the dog turning off the pressure, like when you tell him to sit and apply pressure with an e-collar until his butt hits the ground. the avoidance method corrects the dog when he stops doing what he was supposed to doing, like when he sits but decides to get up, the dog learns he will get corrected and will avoid standing up in the future to avoid a correction. now, this is a very basic explanation of them but hopefully they show the difference between the 2 basic forms of training.

Now to me, using a collar to sit, come, force fetch, force to pile, force into water, etc... is a high pressure system because the dog had to endure and learn to turn off a lot of pressure. I will agree with you whole heartily, a dog that has "successfuly" gone through this, like almost all if not all field trial dogs, are very precise in their responses. I have never said they aint. they do allow you to do things to a dog that is much harder in training to do with the avoidance method, like keep a dog in the water 3 feet off a shoreline. I dont dispute this at all, in fact that is what makes field trials so cool is watching these dogs perform. my whole intent of this was to say you dont need to put a dog through this to get the kind of dog 99.99% of hunters want out of there dog. you dont need to take a chance on making a mistake with this presure and causing the dog to start to pop on a blind or mark, a no go when sent, slow retrieve with tail between legs, etc.... these methods are great for what they are, methods that make a dog more competitive in retriever games but they arent necessary at all to a gun dog, even a finished gun dog. the chance of making a mistake with this pressure is a lot higher than the ohter method and why put the dog through it if it isnt needed?

this is why all of this bothers me, i have seen some very horrific things done to dogs over the years because the people were trying to "put pressure" on the dog to respond the way they wanted. very awful things done to these dogs, both by newbies and very experienced dog people alike. I wont mention names but you know some of them i am sure. some with an ecollar and some by ohter means. i have also sat in Sportmans warehouse for 4 years listening to people talk about what they are going to do to their dog when they get their new collar home and "train the dog". all in all, they underlying theme i have heard a million times is the person wants to "dominate" the dog, thinking if they use enough pressure or force the dog will do what they want.

i am a dog nut, i do what i do because gun dogs are my life. i eat sleep and breathe bird dogs of all kinds. when i see a dog going through something like what i have referred to, it really bothers me because these animals are incredible and dont need to be treated that way. When Sprig died last year, i cried for 3 months because me and him had a bond, a bond i cant even describe to anyone. we were both on the same page, he accomplished all he did in his life not because he had to, but he wanted to. I didnt put much pressure on him, i did FF him but that was it, no e-collar no nothing else, no force to pile, no nothing. i dont prescribe high pressure methods because you dont need them for a great bird dog. Sprig didnt need it, Augie didnt need it, and drake didnt need it, for example. These dogs, as all the rest, worked on trust and a bond with me. That is what richard wolters has built his books around and i agree 1,000,000%.

The funny thing about all of this is if you look at Wolters books, they have many of the same drills and techniques that a lot of the "modern" programs have, like double T, wagon wheel, lining drills, etc..etc... but because it was written many many years ago it is "outdated". people give richard wolters a hard time, unfairly. much of what we do today for dogs is in his books, it just doesnt have a high amount of pressure behind it.


----------



## Pintail Retrievers (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

I don't want to jump into the middle of Jeff and Steve's cat fight hahaha, but I do have a couple of points I want to hit on. Jeff lets be honest you are right in the middle of everyone's reply's here, but I'm in no way shape of form attacking you on this, just want to voice my .02!!!

Jeff, why do you use the term "high pressure" like people are having to pay Utah Power every time they hit the collar button? More often then not, people who take away from the use of e-collars have limited time and knowledge on their use and/or have created a problem from a correction with the collar and are now afraid to put another collar on their dog.

These programs Graham, Lardy's, Farmer and Ay****, Fowl Dawgs, and you mentioned Duck Dog Basics with Akin, are not "high pressure" programs they are "pressure oriented" programs. I own them all and it kind of surprises me that you would suggest Duck Dog Basics when defending that people get to happy with the collar, how does Chris collar condition his dogs? While doing obedience, he gives them a series of nicks until they fall into the position of the command given, essentially turning off the pressure. Novice trainers using that program really don't know the response they are looking for and will more then likely give either to much or not enough, but that is all part of the process. Experience makes you better! There is no one way to train a dog, but I feel like you are giving advice to new comers that would make them afraid of using a pressure oriented system. The result of no-goes, popping, tucked tail, results from the person pushing the button, not from the program they use.


----------



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Good post, pintail.

Pressure or stimulation does not equal high pressure. Not the same thing. Big difference actually. In the example given about teaching sit by saying sit, using (the proper amount of) pressure or stimulation and turning off the pressure once the dog responds correctly, is in many ways more humane, fair with the dog, and effective than continuosly pushing a dogs butt down, or pulling his scruff up, or yanking on a collar and leash while pushing the butt down, etc... The level of stimulation I would use for training or re-affirming most basic commands is (depending on the dog, as they are all different) very low, often lower than I can feel in my own hand. Using stimulation or pressure correctly is not a negative. Using more pressure than is needed to get a desired result is a negative. Using unfair pressure as a punishment is also a negative. Not knowing how to use pressure in a fair manner is a negative. But pressure or stimulation is not rocket science. It is easy to understand as there are many excellent writings and videos that teach and explain it. If someone is using it without regard to fairness to the animal and teaching and training, they are clearly NOT following a program like smartwork or lardy's total retriever. That is completely against what those programs teach. If one would say that these programs are built on high pressure and only dogs that can take high pressure can make it through those programs in totally false. Those programs teach that every dog is different and if you have watched either ones collar conditioning portions of their programs, one would realize how personalized they are and no two dogs would always respond the same way.

Sprig, if you use an e-collar every day, how do you use it or what do you use it for? Do you use it to teach commands, reinforce commands, provide discipline, or what?

Again, not knocking anyones methods or doubting anyones experience, but rather just trying to have an open dialogue and trying to clear up some obvious myths or misunderstandings that exist about certain programs.

Ok, that's it for now, my thumbs are tired from typing on m phone...


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Pintail Retrievers said:


> Jeff, why do you use the term "high pressure" like people are having to pay Utah Power every time they hit the collar button?


ok, i see the problem here. I am NOT referring to high pressure as to turning up the collar to level 8 and holding it down. that is not what i mean by high pressure. maybe i need to come up with a better term for it as you guys dont understand what i am referring to, and that is my fault for not explaining it better. what i am referring to use the use of pressure to motivate the dog, i.e. the dog learns how to turn off the pressure by the correct response. i gave an example earlier which it looks like got missed but i will re-write it.

there are basicly 2 forms or training that use correction, one i will call pressure oriented and one i will avoidance oriented. the pressure oriented is based on turning on pressure and keeping the pressure on until the dog dog what is asked, for example, the dog is told to sit, pressure is applied until the dog sits. that is pressure and the dog learns how to turn off the pressure by sitting. the other method is avoidance, the dog only gets corrected when it does something wrong, like for example, the dog is told to sit and if it stands or moves before it is released correction is applied and the dog is told to sit again. the dog learns from repetition to avoid correction by not moving until released.

Both methods use pressure in some form. but the first method uses alot more of it in a more direct manner. the dog is basicly forced (pressured) into sitting, coming, fetching, going into water, crating up, go to a pile, and so forth. That is what i am reffering to as high pressure, not level 8 on your collar. compared to the avoidance method, the dog does see a lot more pressure and has to be able to handle it. this is where mistakes can easily be made by someone not fully understanding the concept, fully implementing it, changing programs in the middle, cutting corners or just have a dog that is very sensitive and doesnt handle pressure well. not all dogs can handle this method of training very well as some dogs resent pressure and will show in how it runs no matter how well the training went. not all dogs are created equal and not all training programs work with all dogs. i will say that some dogs wont do well on wolters program because there isnt enough pressure to get the dog to respond the correct way but most dogs will respond to a less intense pressure program and there is a less chance of causing a dog to pop, no go, hardmouth, etc..all which are results of the dog not handling the pressure given.

so once again, i am not referring to high pressure to the amount of actuall stimulation the dog gets but the way it is implented and how much pressure the dog sees in training.

I hope that clears it up. 8)


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



tshuntin said:


> Good post, pintail.
> 
> In the example given about teaching sit by saying sit, using (the proper amount of) pressure or stimulation and turning off the pressure once the dog responds correctly, is in many ways more humane, fair with the dog, and effective than continuosly pushing a dogs butt down, or pulling his scruff up, or yanking on a collar and leash while pushing the butt down, etc... The level of stimulation I would use for training or re-affirming most basic commands is (depending on the dog, as they are all different) very low, often lower than I can feel in my own hand...


the level of stimulation is only half the issue with a pressure oriented program, timing is the other half and is in part, like the level of pressure given, why some handlers crash and burn. people are too slow or too quick to correct a dog or to apply "pressure" when things go wrong, just like they use too much or even in some cases, not enough stimulation to get the point across. these are the mistakes that are made because handler A sees how handler B does it and assumes all dogs respond in the same manner, which they dont in the least. that only comes from experience from training many many dogs and seeing first hand that they all are different and dont all train the same way or respond the same way to the same training method. if all dogs handled pressure and training the same way, every dog out there would be a fc afc mh dog but they aint because not all dogs have it in them and not all dogs can handle the same types of training.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Mar 9, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*

Well I just skimmed through this last chapter of Gone With the Wind and will reply when I have time to read it a little more..
For right now I would like to make a point that seems to be getting missed.*YOU DO NOT TEACH WITH THE COLLAR*. You teach everything manually then conditition your dog to the collar then use it to reinforce known comands.
More later.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Steve Shaver said:


> *YOU DO NOT TEACH WITH THE COLLAR*. You teach everything manually then conditition your dog to the collar then use it to reinforce known comands.
> More later.


yes, i know that. my whole training program is based around teaching everything manually. I am a very "hands-on" dog trainer. *if you aint touching the dog, you aint training the dog*. the difference for me is i dont use pressure the same way as what it seems most of you use it, refer back a few posts to see what i am talking about.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



tshuntin said:


> Sprig, if you want, with your next pup, I would be glad to borrow you my entire set of Graham stuff


send it over, i will take you up on that but for a completely different reason.


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



tshuntin said:


> will only take you to the next level as a a trainer. The different success you could have could be scary good! Again, this is not a knock to what you do now, as you have trained a lot of dogs, but major next level buddy is possible for sure!!


i have already gone to the next level, i train pointing dogs now. :O•-: :lol: :mrgreen:


----------



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Sprig Kennels said:


> there are basicly 2 forms or training that use correction, one i will call pressure oriented and one i will avoidance oriented. the pressure oriented is based on turning on pressure and keeping the pressure on until the dog dog what is asked, for example, the dog is told to sit, pressure is applied until the dog sits. that is pressure and the dog learns how to turn off the pressure by sitting. the other method is avoidance, the dog only gets corrected when it does something wrong, like for example, the dog is told to sit and if it stands or moves before it is released correction is applied and the dog is told to sit again. the dog learns from repetition to avoid correction by not moving until released.


So which of these two methods of applying pressure is more effective, more fair, more humane? Which of these methods could use a stronger more direct instant higher amount of pressure, therefore potentially causing more issues to the dog? Which one of these do you think gets used more by people who are not educated on the prpoer use and conditioning of a collar? The one that rewards the dog by turning off the pressure for doing the right thing or the one that punishes the dog for doing the wrong thing?


----------



## tshuntin (Jul 13, 2008)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



Sprig Kennels said:


> this is where mistakes can easily be made by someone not fully understanding the concept, fully implementing it, changing programs in the middle, cutting corners or ....


DING DING DING!!! I totally agree. BUT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PROGRAM!!! This has to do with NOT following the program. I have sensed the programs being blamed for the handler/trainers lack of attention and focus in following the program. It is not the fault of a very good solid thorough program if a dog fails simply because of the inability of the handler to follow thoroughly and not skip around or jump ahead or miss stuff. That is the trainers fault, not the programs and certainly not the dogs.



> not all dogs can handle this method of training very well as some dogs resent pressure and will show in how it runs no matter how well the training went. not all dogs are created equal and not all training programs work with all dogs. i will say that some dogs wont do well on wolters program because there isnt enough pressure to get the dog to respond the correct way but most dogs will respond to a less intense pressure program and there is a less chance of causing a dog to pop, no go, hardmouth, etc..all which are results of the dog not handling the pressure given.


I would argue that just about any dog would have success in a very good thorough modern program such as Smartwork if followed correctly. It is about reading the dog, being aware of how the dog handles pressure (and not just the e-collar is pressure - voice, stressfull situations, leashes, challenges and obstacles, etc.. are all examples of pressure) knowing when to push and when not to push too far, proper reward and praise, and the list goes on.... Yes, you are correct that not all dogs are cookie cutter dogs, that is why it is important to know the dog and adjust as needed, but the basics of the program in getting from step 1 to 2 to 3 to etc....is the same. Basics are basics and fundementals are fundementals.

Great discussion fellers! Makes me want to get out and do some training!


----------



## Sprig Kennels (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Thinking of training my Golden Retriever into a duck hun*



tshuntin said:


> So which of these two methods of applying pressure is more effective, more fair, more humane?


my honest opinion, the avoidance method hands down. there is much less chance of mistakes, in my opinion, with this method because of less pressure is involved. there is a lot more to it than just "correcting" a dog for bad behavior to go into here. the dog is doing it because he wants to, he made the choice based on right and wrong and not a conditioned response. for me, that makes a happier dog and that is more humane. and this just isnt based on retrievers but all dogs in general as both methods can and are used for basic obedience training for non-hunting dogs. i had a dog here this year that would show you what i mean. the dog was super sensitive and the owner was at his last straw with the dog and sent him to me. i worked with the dog, giving it opportunity after opportunity to make decisions and grow. it did just that, the dog made great strides in just a few short months. this dog, if someone would have put it through a pressure oriented program would have shut down on the trainer in a week, guaranteed. the dog wouldnt have handled it at all. not all dogs can handle that kind of training but more of them can handle the avoidance method because it is a praise/correction based system and dogs are smart animals, they can choose correctly if given half a chance to make the decision.



tshuntin said:


> Which of these methods could use a stronger more direct instant higher amount of pressure, therefore potentially causing more issues to the dog?


either program, the "amount" of pressure is up the individual user and how he reads the dog, if, however, you are talking about pressure in terms of higher stimulation. if you are talking about pressure like i defined it earlier then i would say a pressure oriented system would do that. we all need to get on the same page when we talk about pressure because i think there are some confusions on what we are all meaning by the word.



tshuntin said:


> Which one of these do you think gets used more by people who are not educated on the prpoer use and conditioning of a collar? The one that rewards the dog by turning off the pressure for doing the right thing or the one that punishes the dog for doing the wrong thing?


ok, there is a big difference in a "reward" and a "conditioned response". pressure training is a conditioned response, a reward is praise or some kind of positive stimuli for the dog. dogs have emmotions and feelings and they do know when they have done something good and understand a true "reward", it makes them happy. just dealing with pressure isnt a reward to a dog in this sense, they arent responding because they want to, they are responding because they have to. that is why i prefer a different approach, dogs are doing it this way, they way i have been describing because they made a choice and do it because of the praise and reward they from it.

One more point i want to make about all of this and then i need to get back to watching football :lol: ....there was a great example of all of this at the WHRC master test this past summer. a handler was running a dog for someone else that had, from what he told me, shut down on the owner because he didnt respond or handle pressure well at all. the handler said he just made it fun for the dog and took off all the pressure for the dog and the dog responded in a big way. watching that guy run that dog was one of the best dog/handler performances i have ever seen at a hunt test and this handler recognized the pressure that was on the dog and removed it and the dog was fantastic. from what the handler said to me, it was a totally different dog after he got to work with the dog. he didnt do any "training" as the dog was already "trained". he just took the pressure off the dog and that made all the difference. i know the handler and i have a ton of respect for him and how he worked with the dog to get him to run like that. that was a perfect example of what i have been saying about pressure.

now back to college football. o-||


----------

