I'd heard of ear pinch, but toe pinch?

Thanks for the replies all, interesting discussion.
Has anyone read Clothier's "Reliability and the Retrieve"? Great article, and absolutely applies here.
Flying Dog Press - Suzanne Clothier - RELIABIITY & THE RETRIEVE: Justifying the Ear Pinch?

I think its telling that even Leerburg's Ed Frawley, after seeing motivational retrieves, is saying "It is our belief that a dog should not be force trained to retrieve." And this is the guy who has a detailed explanation on his website of how to properly hang a human aggressive dog until he passes out.

I have to say, maybe its because we've always had rescues with issues, but I was really struck by how forgiving the dogs in the different videos were. Its an odd combination of stoicism and tolerance. I know that treatment would shut down 3 of my dogs before you ever got anything in their mouth, and the fourth would figure out really quickly to put the handler in his mouth instead.

:lol-sign:
True, true...

I am surprised though at everyone who says it takes longer.
Granted I've never trained a field retrieve, and I've never trained any retrieve with force, but I did train our mutt dog to retrieve a book in about 10 minutes a day for 6 days with a combination of clicker training and winging it b/c I've never taught this before. (He's a therapy dog and its a cute trick for school and library visits.)
I understand that there is a difference between "cute trick" and what you need in the field or for a service dog, but the concept of taking something in his mouth and bringing it to the handler is the same to the dog no?

I don't have hunting dogs and have never trained one but I can offer insight as to why these methods are still widely used. The argument that most people involved in training hunting dogs have is that, so far no one has shown that they have trained even one dog to the highest levels of field trial work using positive training. Let alone having success with multiple dogs. So the results of positive training in this area are not even close to being considered proven. Until they are, you can argue that in theory using positive training for this type of work is better but don't expect that people will pay much attention. People have taught personal hunting dogs without the use of a forced fetch or ecollars but unless they train a large number of other dogs to proven reliability (such as being competitive in field trials), people aren't going to switch from long proven methods. If people were out there competing and winning at the highest levels of field trials with multiple dogs that were trained with all positive methods, other people would be eager to learn their secrets. Most people are not interested in being innovators but most are interested in newer, better, faster ways to do things once they are proven to be effective.

It would seem that competition obedience retrieves and even service dog retrieves are far less demanding than the retrieving that a dog must do in field work. In field work, the dog must be able to retrieve birds which the handler has pointed at but that he can't see, out of land and water and in the great outdoors with any number of distractions on his way to and from the bird.

Ares was force retrieve trained. It took about three months.

Morgan was trained with no force and back chaining and she learned her retrieve in about a week, working on it for maybe a minute a day.

The amount of stress involved in training a force retrieve slows down the ability to learn.

But, while Morgan's retrieve is fairly reliable, it's no where near as reliable as Ares' when the conditions get extreme.

Granted, that's only two dogs and they have very different personalities, working styles, learning abilities, drives, etc.

To do the retrieve, service dogs have to be able to 1.) go to the correct object on the first cue even if the owner can't point to it; 2.) pick up the object carefully so as not to damage it or drop it (no chewing or shaking!); 3.) carry it without chewing it; 4.) hold it until the owner asks for it, even if that means heeling with it or doing a sit/down stay; and 5.) deliver it appropriately to the owner, who may or may not be able to reach out and grab it, so that the owner doesn't drop it. They have to do this with an incredibly large variety of objects: credit cards, coins, makeup brushes, utensils, plastic grocery bags with groceries in them, blankets, the list is endless. I know of a dog that retrieves CPR dummies. And they have to do this in any environment, with any number of distractions.

I taught Luna to retrieve years ago, before I started training service dogs, and she's good at it; it's quite useful sometimes. But even her retrieve is really not refined enough to be a service dog retrieve.

I wanted to revisit this as I learn more about the retrieve.

This is my dog. 100% motivationally trained. Obviously not competition ready, no SD material here either, and clearly the distractions are at a minimum.
But I think its safe to say that the dog understands the concept of a retrieve. He understands that he has to pick up any object, (first item is string cheese, still in the wrapper. Second item is a pot holder, third item is a small plastic gum container).
He gets that he has to hold things a certain way, and he holds them until told to release. (He's missing a canine on the bottom which is why he had trouble holding on to the smaller plastic container.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kj06hQA7Po
This is a blooper, but again, it shows what he knows. 100% clicker trained.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfn1nBCuag

This dog is also 100% motivationally trained. Remi also has a JH (and possibly more hunting titles, but with literally over 100 titles, I can't keep up )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WidfKx9WKc0

And another motivational retrieve, different breed, different venue.
www.athosmalinois.com/isaclick.wmv

Sorry for the video overload, but I wanted to show many angles.

And the traditional ear pinch. I have to assume this is the correct way to teach a retrieve with an ear pinch, as I do not know. I do know that this particular trainer is very successful in both the ring and the field.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfL8oYeqaPs

Here's what's floating around in my head and hopefully I can articulate it somewhat clearly...
One method uses R+, the other uses R-. The general consensus justifying the R- method seems to be that it creates a more reliable behavior. I guess what I don't understand is what makes us so sure that removal of a punishment is MORE motivating to a dog than receiving a reward? In my experience (which granted is limited by comparison) dogs seem to be just as, if not more motivated to gain a reward than to avoid a punishment. Just look at the dog who grits his teeth and blows through the underground fence line to chase a squirrel. Reward trumps the punishment. So why would the same not be true in training a retrieve?

I'm genuinely curious. I don't think people who train with ear pinches and toe pinches are sadistic monsters, quite the opposite, people who work with dogs for a living by and large adore their dogs and would not want to intentionally harm them in any way. So I have to assume there is a good reason for preferring the R- method over the R+ one.
So what is it?

I am not sure. I took a class where the ear pinch was taught (and yes he loved his dogs) by a well known mainly aversive trainer. He didn't force it on anyone, he just demoed it and offered to help anyone who wanted to work on their retrieve that way.

I of course didn't. But I watched with interest. Kaiden had had zero interest in toys, in fetching etc. I mean if you tossed a toy he walked off, if you got all excited about it his response was "thats nice you play with that I am going to go over here and lie down till something interesting happens" I trained him to retrieve, not in a fully positive way. BUT I did train a very very high reliability retrieve. In fact I dont' think he has EVER failed.

Let me share a story

I sometimes suck at throwing the dumbell at trials. I dunno why. Well we were doing open back in the day and I threw the dumbell right up against the white lattice that was the end of the ring. I sent Kaiden. He couldn't see it. He looked around and then hopped out of the ring. I looked to the judge, and she said "leave him", as he was obviously still looking. He went out to the main part of the building, went through the crowd looking. Totally ignoring the people eating at the back and the other dogs. He kept coming by the end of the ring. FINALLY he used his nose, found where it was, jumped back in the ring, grabbed the dumbell and brought it back (of course we failed as he downed on his out of sight sit...)

Now I don't agree with the judge letting him continue. And our next round he grabbed the dumbell, jumped out of the ring, did a tour of the 'audience' and then jumped back in and did a perfect front lol. JRTs.

However as an example of reliability I think that is pretty crazy, esp for a dog where retrieve had to be totally trained from scratch. I would expect that more from Dekka who is obsessed with retrieving (even metal, as we have the cutest little scent articles) and much more persistent in her desire to fulfill a task.

As to the ppl who trained with the ear pinch. Their retrieves were not more reliable, nor faster learnt. I think it works well for 'poor' trainers. Its easy to get the timing right, you don't have to worry about motivating the dog, and the criteria is simple. There is also the advantage that in this case the application of pain often causes a response naturally that you want (ie opening the mouth) that makes it even simpler for the trainers. IME people use punishment because its easier for them.

I tend to agree, with the people I know who still train with the old school correctional based methods, they don't understand or know how to motivate their dog especially in a way that will make their dog reliable. And for a lot of those people it's about using the methods they are familiar with, change can be hard when you've been doing the same thing for a long time and have always believed x is the best way to do y.

Many (probably most, actually) SD trainers do not believe in using treats to train dogs. Some use treats in the beginning, but once the dog "knows" the behavior they stop using them. Their reasoning is that they want the dog to never eat in public. If they don't get treats, the dog will not steal food in restaurants, eat from strangers, eat foreign bodies on the ground, etc.

Obviously I don't agree with this, and a debate over this reasoning is really pointless. I'm just saying that's what they believe.

So you can imagine that if you never want to give a dog a treat, there's not a whole lot else that will motivate most dogs enough to do a truely reliable retrieve. Yes, there are zillions of other rewards besides food, but it takes a lot of creativity to use these rewards and it's just much faster and easier to do an ear/toe pinch instead.

I really don't get why anyone needs to use a forced retrieve. Gavroche has a WONDERFUL retrieve, and it was all positive reinforcement. And he's a boxer, so he didn't really have any "retrieve instinct" to begin with. It did take FOREVER to get him to put his mouth on the article and not his feet, but once that clicked it was easy to get it into a solid, gentle retrieve. Retrieving is also now one of his absolute favorite things to do (like, the same magnitude as eating and playing with his jolly ball).

I don't know that it is "easier", but it is what people know. It works for them, it has worked for them, they see no reason to change it. People rationalize whatever they believe in not only in training, but everything.

I do not use a forced retrieve myself, but have seen it done. and to get it done to where the dog will score nice points in the sport I do, takes work, great timing, and yes, great skill. If you don't have it, you end up with a huge mess. When you have skill, it can result in a really nice retrieve.

Fast out and back, no mouthing, good attitude. If you are a "poor" trainer, it will show, and it will show regardless of the method you use.

Argh... Chaz messes up for me a lot still. Couldn't get on at all yesterday afternoon...

Saeleofu, I laughed at your description of Gavroche Bates is mostly boxer too, and my biggest issue is him using his feet for EVERYTHING! Fortunately when it comes to default behaviors, a muzzle punch is a close second, so I was able to shape that in to an initial hold.
(Totally separate note, I was working on fronts one day in class and he got pissed enough about me upping the criteria that he leaped up in the air (I'm 5'9") and muzzle punched me in the nose. "Is THIS close enough?" And of course everyone in class, including the trainer laughs. Darned dog.)

Speaking of default behaviors, I don't know that punishment is "easier" but it definitely seems to be a default behavior for us humans.
I guess my issue though, is that the ear pinch and toe pinch really have a rather limited application. Using the method on the most recent video I posted, that would only work for a very small portion of the dog population. I'm teaching Breez (great dane) a retrieve right now, and I can't imagine them holding a full grown GD between them like that. Breez wouldn't get aggressive, but she would leave. And two flimsy gals on two flimsy folding chairs ain't gonna stop her

What about softer breeds? They would simply shut down.
What about more opinionated dogs? You'd get your face bitten off.
What about dogs like my GD, they'd just muscle their way out of there.

Now, agreed, not every dog is meant to learn a retrieve... The whole there's a reason cowboys don't drive cattle with chihuahuas while riding clydesdales thing. I get that. But the pool of dogs able to learn a retrieve with ear pinches seems way smaller to me than the one who can learn it with motivational methods. No?

Oh Lizzybeth, that whole don't use food to train otherwise the dog won't learn to ignore food drives me nuts!!! (Probably because I was right there at one point.)
Done RIGHT, food training teaches dogs better manners around food than anything else I've seen. One of the things our trainer has us do is train with the food available in the middle of the training area. It makes a great distraction and it gets the food off your body. So many little tricks like this, and the dogs learn that just because the food is there, doesn't mean its for the taking.

Oh, I don't know... R+ training is *really* forgiving. If you screw up, just change the criteria. Easy to fix. Yeah, you can still get sloppy behaviors with R+, but its a heck of a lot easier to "undo the damage" so-to-speak. (I would know from personal experience with teaching sloppy behaviors )

I don't know, how can we argue in one post about the strength of reward based training and how powerful motivators are for dogs, but then say in another post it's easy to fix damage caused by bad R+ training?

IMO bad training is bad training.

I was at some drive training workshops recently, we did two day long workshops. It's always interesting when you get dogs and owners up to do practical stuff - the people who have trained a lot of manners and rewarded their dogs for calmness around people struggle just as much as those who have used a lot of physical corrections with their dogs. In both instances the dogs have been taught not to exhibit drive around the handler, especially when you have an adult dog who has been rewarded from early puppy hood always to be well mannered and calm. That is something that is very hard to break!

i've seen weak, soft dogs do powerful fast retrieves, and it wasn't taught motivationally. I don't have the the desire to go thru the steps to do that, but the pool isn't smaller, it only seems smaller because you have no understanding of it. You have only what you think of it.

you don't understand compulsion, you don't understand it's application. You only know what you've read and think is true.

How 'bout we agree that I won't make assumptions about you if you don't make assumptions about me. 'Cause there's a lot of assumptions I could make about you based on the tone of your post.
I have trained dogs (and horses) to very high levels using compulsion. I used to compete at the national level in hunter/jumpers, and trained most of my competitors horses in juniors. Horses back then were (and still are) trained nearly exclusively with R-/P+. I understand compulsion. In fact, I understand it well enough that I can forsee where you will run in to problems. Which is why I posed the thoughts I did.

No, I do not have any experience with an ear pinch, but I have enough experience with dogs, especially "misfit" dogs (those not bred and groomed from day one to do a certain job) that again, I can forsee potential pitfalls.
Since you did not dispute the ear pinch video I posted, I have to assume that is, in your opinion, a proper application of an ear pinch.

Tell me, how would you apply that method to a 140 pound great dane who is strong enough to just leave? I can imagine a few solutions, I'm curious as to what others who have first hand experience would do or have done. I imagine its not pretty.
I can post another video of an ear pinch being done to a rottie. The rottie snaps at the handler and I have no doubt would have bitten if pushed. Tell me, how do you apply an ear pinch to a dog who won't tolerate that treatment? How far will you escalate? Have you heard Michael Ellis' (who also understands compulsion quite well) thoughts on forcing dogs like that?

Because one of the strengths of R+ training IS that its easy to undo mistakes.
I disagree with your example. You can't train drive OUT of a dog with any method. My dogs have on and off buttons - trained. There are times that I want them to be calm and other times I want them to be driven, but with focus. Just because I have taught them a settle command doesn't mean I can't turn them back on again.
This seriously makes zero sense to me, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying?
To me it sounds like you're saying you have to sacrifice manners for drive which is completely not true. Yeah, drivey dogs are annoying as heck, but you absolutely can teach and reinforce manners without diminishing drive.

you can assume all you want about me.

I didn't watch your ear pinch video, i have no use for an ear pinch or toe pinch or any other pinch to teach a dog a retrieve.

I know Michael Ellis, and he does understand dog training, what does he have to do with this?

Of course there are pitfalls, of course you can cause harm to you or your dog. I'm not disputing that.

I was disputing that it is "easy" and takes less skill to get a nice forced retrieve. In fact, I'd think it's more difficult. i've seen plenty of them. It used to be the preferred method for everyone, and still is for a lot of people. I've seen ugly ones, unfinished ones, and very nice ones, from all sorts of methods.

I think you really have to understand compulsion and it's application to get a nice retrieve if that's the course you choose to use. If not, it shows. So does crappy motivational retrieving. that's why I said bad training is bad training.

The fact you think that a soft dog can't be force retrieved tells me you don't understand it near as well as you think you do.

It's much easier to clicker (or shape) train a retrieve with any dog. I'm lazy, I like the easy route, I'm just lucky that easy is healthier too.

His take on compulsion relates directly to my question of how (if) you can use an ear pinch with a dog who does not put up with being forced.

I didn't say I didn't think it could be done, I asked HOW you would. I have seen some very nice retrieves taught with e-collars, and yes that could work on a "soft" dog too. But that's not an ear pinch is it? And no, I am not advocating using an ecollar to teach a retrieve. But it is an example of compulsion.

This. 1000x over.

You know, there's one trainer at a local club who's "positive only". He's obsessed with Ian Dunbar, he hits up lots of seminars, blah blah blah, "very educated", I'm sure. He crabs at other club members for occasionally using collar corrections, and he once asked me why I was using a pinch collar (and no, I didn't give a single collar correction in the ring) at a correction clinic. None of his god **** business is why. Why does he have a freaking face yanker on his dog?

I went up against him and his FCR in a Rally Advanced B class, and we CREAMED him. They scored an 84, we scored a 100. I saw his round. There was no contest. His dog was not just unfocused, the dog was ... poorly trained. Unclear on cues, and offering inconsistent responses, very poor stimulus differentiation - no one, the dog included, seemed to know exactly what would make the dog sit, down, stand, etc.

Not a fluke. Happened AGAIN - in fact, happened at all 3 of our Rally trials. We trounced them every time we went up against them, and one round they barely even Q'd.

Bad training. Bad bad bad training. Bad handler with bad timing and poor training skills. Lots of experience, all the "right" methods, terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE application. His dogs perform poorly on a consistent basis - both his spaniel, his FCR... the only consistent factor is him.

I'm not saying I don't think there are training methods that are better and work for most dogs, and methods that are worse and work for fewer dogs. But the reality is that it's the application of any method that makes or breaks it.

As for "What would a force fetch trainer do with THIS dog, or THIS dog?" Why don't you ask someone experienced in the forced retrieve? You've seen a few videos on the method, they've been doing it their whole lives. If I watched a video on clicker training and said, "That might work for their dog, but it will NEVER work for mine. He'd just do x,y,z!" you'd probably shred me for not understanding the method, and rightfully so.

I think it's kind of funny that the consensus is, "DOGS don't need P+ (or R-), trainers do. Any dog could be trained using exclusively R+ if the handler could utilize it properly!" But you know, the opposite, a dog "requiring" R+ to learn a retrieve, has everybody nodding in a agreement. What happened to not understanding the method? It's all still learning theory, and like it or not, R- is mighty powerful. If anybody trashed R+ training (while having NO experience in it), they'd get ripped a new one, I'm sure.

Btw, as far as how to force fetch a GD, I know nothing of force fetching, but even I know that many trainers use some of sort of system of restraint, like a table with a post, etc.

Anyway, I've never really understood the point of these threads. It's like a CM thread - everybody agrees that it's not the best way, it's dumb, etc, and everybody pats themselves on the back and we all feel self-righteous for no real reason. Woo freaking hoo.

Sorry. I clicker trained my dog's retrieve and polished it with an e-collar. I'm really kind of over how other people do it, and have no need to poke at their methods to vindicate my own.

ETA: and for the record, I don't think the dog "needed" the e-collar, but it worked and I don't regret it one bit. And also for the record, I rarely if ever use collar correction anymore, for those who are wondering. I use R+ almost exclusively.

Emily, you are a ****ing genius! Awesome post, i hope some read it, and re-read it and if it hasn't sunk in read it again till it does.