I'm Growing Disappointed
- Thread starter DanL
- Start date
Nope I think everything has been said, and MR has dug himself a really nice deep hole, in public.
I don't think to many people acted badly.. Some people have a lower BS threshold than others. He was very very rude to me, I stayed as polite as possible, and tried to get him to answer some questions. (none answered though)
It was fun at the time, now its getting old.
I don't think to many people acted badly.. Some people have a lower BS threshold than others. He was very very rude to me, I stayed as polite as possible, and tried to get him to answer some questions. (none answered though)
It was fun at the time, now its getting old.
Ritchling was a jerk and, IMO, not knowledgable about dog training at all (he was like a broken record that played "I go PATROLLING, I go PATROLLING!" in an endless loop) but I do think a lot of forum members went over the line in replying to his students. Yeah, Martin Ritchling was rude and sexist, but his students are not him. It's not fair to reply to them the same way you would to Martin.
You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Maybe if less people had responded with things in the vein of, "LOLZ, I don't need to listen to you because you beat your dog, you are just here to cause trouble, etc", then maybe some of his students would have changed their minds or become interested in positive training. But when people start telling you right off how stupid and terrible you are, you're less inclined to listen to them.
After all, did Ritchling's snide attitude convince any of the regulars here that he was right? Or did they cause everyone to view him more and more negatively and to dismiss his training techniques even more as he got ruder and ruder? The pendulum swings both ways . . .
You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Maybe if less people had responded with things in the vein of, "LOLZ, I don't need to listen to you because you beat your dog, you are just here to cause trouble, etc", then maybe some of his students would have changed their minds or become interested in positive training. But when people start telling you right off how stupid and terrible you are, you're less inclined to listen to them.
After all, did Ritchling's snide attitude convince any of the regulars here that he was right? Or did they cause everyone to view him more and more negatively and to dismiss his training techniques even more as he got ruder and ruder? The pendulum swings both ways . . .
Dekka, you were polite and patient. And yes, I noticed how he didn't or couldn't answer many of the questions.
Oh yes they are. Boemy, the vast majority of his "students" were one in the same as MR. Did you not see the posts just previous? He was using multiple user accounts with the same IP number, yet another deceitful act of desperation and a severe violation of forum rules.
I have zero tolerance for animal abuse and no threshold at all for such as we saw here. Sorry to all who are all for political correctness but I don't buy into that at all. I will say what I think and if what I think are vile thoughts, my words will tend to reflect that. So, sorry to anyone else if indirectly I offended you or disappointed you. But I just loathe animal abusers. They're the worst excuse for a human being on the planet. And by his own words, he showed himself for what he is for all to see. And hopefully, he won't be touching too many dogs in the future. All his desperate attempts at selling himself, I believe fell on deaf ears....except for the ears of his deceitful alter egos. There may be one or two followers besides himself.
You're right Boemy...you can catch more bees with honey. But these bees.....these cult-like followers who have the stomach to do what they do to dogs and/or to support a person like MR...if they are able to stand up and support him, (his own words of half drowning a dog for digging, choking a dog until it passes out and the rest of it) they will not have what it takes to stand up for dogs. They may say they do and they may not beat their dogs. But you can't be for him and be for dogs too. They will not be open for change like a lot of people IMO. It's like trying to reason with a shark. They don't have the stuff it's made of to go to the honey. Actually, you'd have better luck with a shark. Anyone who defends in any way or supports someone like that is as low as he is. IMO. Like I said, "ZERO tolerance for animal abuse."
Oh yes they are. Boemy, the vast majority of his "students" were one in the same as MR. Did you not see the posts just previous? He was using multiple user accounts with the same IP number, yet another deceitful act of desperation and a severe violation of forum rules.
I have zero tolerance for animal abuse and no threshold at all for such as we saw here. Sorry to all who are all for political correctness but I don't buy into that at all. I will say what I think and if what I think are vile thoughts, my words will tend to reflect that. So, sorry to anyone else if indirectly I offended you or disappointed you. But I just loathe animal abusers. They're the worst excuse for a human being on the planet. And by his own words, he showed himself for what he is for all to see. And hopefully, he won't be touching too many dogs in the future. All his desperate attempts at selling himself, I believe fell on deaf ears....except for the ears of his deceitful alter egos. There may be one or two followers besides himself.
You're right Boemy...you can catch more bees with honey. But these bees.....these cult-like followers who have the stomach to do what they do to dogs and/or to support a person like MR...if they are able to stand up and support him, (his own words of half drowning a dog for digging, choking a dog until it passes out and the rest of it) they will not have what it takes to stand up for dogs. They may say they do and they may not beat their dogs. But you can't be for him and be for dogs too. They will not be open for change like a lot of people IMO. It's like trying to reason with a shark. They don't have the stuff it's made of to go to the honey. Actually, you'd have better luck with a shark. Anyone who defends in any way or supports someone like that is as low as he is. IMO. Like I said, "ZERO tolerance for animal abuse."
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2006
- Messages
- 1,083
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
Dan, I agree with most of what you said. It seems that if you don't train a la the methods of certain members, you get mocked and that's just not right. It has always seemed strange to me that some of those who highly advocate positive reinforcement are the ones least likely to use it in regards to other humans.
I wasn't near the computer much the past few weeks so I haven't been in on any of the recent "discussions". I don't advocate some of the training methods I see people talking about. Of course these are not new methods - the half-drowning is straight out of the original Koehler book of the '60's.
But I don't even see this as a training conflict or even really about this Richling guy .. if you have a problem with someone's methods and you think you have a better answer, then give YOUR method and let the people decide what's better. If your method is better the people will see that and you'll have increased their knowledge. Making fun of someone, acting like a child and slapping each other on the back for throwing insults doesn't help in any way.
I've always believed that moderators may still be members but they have accepted a role that should provide an example to others. That means that if they say "sure, I'll be a mod" then they have agreed to NOT call others names, belittle them, gang up on them, etc. To do that and then to excuse it with saying "but I'm a member" is wrong, especially when they then use their powers as a mod to edit or close the thread. This higher level of behavior is how it's been on other forums I'm on, but somehow that's gotten lost on this forum. Granted, moderating can be a thankful job but NO ONE is forced to do it. I can only think that they don't realize how they come across to the general public when they do this .. I prefer to think that over thinking that they are deliberately mis-using their powers.
Caveat: of course not ALL moderators fall into the category above. If a moderator takes insult, then maybe truth stings a bit.
As far as the heated threads and how they get more posts than other threads .. well, there are reasons for that. First, those who post advice just plain get tired of saying the same thing over and over. If all those who came on here and asked questions first did a search, they'd find that most questions have been asked and answered before. I don't blame the trainers on here for not getting excited about answering another question about housebreaking or loose leash walking .. we've answered those so many times that it's just easier to not even notice them. But a thread full of conflict .. woah, that's exciting .. *L* .. it pulls people out of the doldrums and they find themselves checking frequently to see if any new responses have been made. What I don't understand is the people who post things like "this thread is so disgusting" or "why are you people still adding fuel to this?". It's SO easy to just not read something if you're truly not interested in it. You're not fooling anyone when you post that stuff .. *LOL* .. we all know you're clicking "refresh" over and over hoping someone will respond.
And forums are a place for people to be assertive and confrontational, especially if they're under real/time stress. I think back to when my Dad was dying of cancer (years ago, before I ever came here) and I was pretty darn grumpy online at times. But it was a stress-reliever, I will admit. And no one had to respond to me, of course .. if they did, then they were (in essence) accepting my response.
Oh, and while I'm rambling on (I expect everyone has quit reading by now .. *G*) .. while I don't recommend striking a dog to create pain as a correction, there ARE dogs out there who actually like to be hit. One of Trick's favorite games is for me to smack her with a stick or rope or piece of hose. She goes into a ears-forward, excited/happy dog mode and barks at me until I smack her again (while she tries to grab whatever I have). It sounds bizarre, perhaps, to those with softer dogs .. but this is a game she has always absolutely thrived on. We used to use this as a "rev up" before agility practice runs. In fact, one of the purely positive trainers here went looking for a high-drive malinois because she wanted a dog as tough as Trick.
It just goes to show that not all dogs are the same. Would I play that game with my other dogs? Heck no! They'd hate it. I do play "beat the puppy with my socks" with Khana when I get dressed and she loves grabbing at my socks (so what if they get holes in them .. we're having FUN .. *L*). But physical interactions/corrections are not neccessarily a BAD thing. They need to be appropriate for the particular dog .. in a way that avoids diminishing the relationship you have with your dog. That CAN be done. And I understand why many on here discourage physical corrections, because often people don't have the knowledge to fully gauge how their dogs are reacting. You're far better off making mistakes using positive reinforcement than punishment.
By the way .. in all honesty I would say that the percentage of people on here who balance +R with +P is quite a bit higher than estimated .. they are just not as willing to speak up because of the reactions they get. And that's kind of sad because when they're driven away from here they'll just go to a forum that encourages them to use corrections .. and that surely goes against what many on here want to do. Pushing them away doesn't help their dogs ..
Okay, all done ..
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
I wasn't near the computer much the past few weeks so I haven't been in on any of the recent "discussions". I don't advocate some of the training methods I see people talking about. Of course these are not new methods - the half-drowning is straight out of the original Koehler book of the '60's.
But I don't even see this as a training conflict or even really about this Richling guy .. if you have a problem with someone's methods and you think you have a better answer, then give YOUR method and let the people decide what's better. If your method is better the people will see that and you'll have increased their knowledge. Making fun of someone, acting like a child and slapping each other on the back for throwing insults doesn't help in any way.
I've always believed that moderators may still be members but they have accepted a role that should provide an example to others. That means that if they say "sure, I'll be a mod" then they have agreed to NOT call others names, belittle them, gang up on them, etc. To do that and then to excuse it with saying "but I'm a member" is wrong, especially when they then use their powers as a mod to edit or close the thread. This higher level of behavior is how it's been on other forums I'm on, but somehow that's gotten lost on this forum. Granted, moderating can be a thankful job but NO ONE is forced to do it. I can only think that they don't realize how they come across to the general public when they do this .. I prefer to think that over thinking that they are deliberately mis-using their powers.
Caveat: of course not ALL moderators fall into the category above. If a moderator takes insult, then maybe truth stings a bit.
As far as the heated threads and how they get more posts than other threads .. well, there are reasons for that. First, those who post advice just plain get tired of saying the same thing over and over. If all those who came on here and asked questions first did a search, they'd find that most questions have been asked and answered before. I don't blame the trainers on here for not getting excited about answering another question about housebreaking or loose leash walking .. we've answered those so many times that it's just easier to not even notice them. But a thread full of conflict .. woah, that's exciting .. *L* .. it pulls people out of the doldrums and they find themselves checking frequently to see if any new responses have been made. What I don't understand is the people who post things like "this thread is so disgusting" or "why are you people still adding fuel to this?". It's SO easy to just not read something if you're truly not interested in it. You're not fooling anyone when you post that stuff .. *LOL* .. we all know you're clicking "refresh" over and over hoping someone will respond.
And forums are a place for people to be assertive and confrontational, especially if they're under real/time stress. I think back to when my Dad was dying of cancer (years ago, before I ever came here) and I was pretty darn grumpy online at times. But it was a stress-reliever, I will admit. And no one had to respond to me, of course .. if they did, then they were (in essence) accepting my response.
Oh, and while I'm rambling on (I expect everyone has quit reading by now .. *G*) .. while I don't recommend striking a dog to create pain as a correction, there ARE dogs out there who actually like to be hit. One of Trick's favorite games is for me to smack her with a stick or rope or piece of hose. She goes into a ears-forward, excited/happy dog mode and barks at me until I smack her again (while she tries to grab whatever I have). It sounds bizarre, perhaps, to those with softer dogs .. but this is a game she has always absolutely thrived on. We used to use this as a "rev up" before agility practice runs. In fact, one of the purely positive trainers here went looking for a high-drive malinois because she wanted a dog as tough as Trick.
It just goes to show that not all dogs are the same. Would I play that game with my other dogs? Heck no! They'd hate it. I do play "beat the puppy with my socks" with Khana when I get dressed and she loves grabbing at my socks (so what if they get holes in them .. we're having FUN .. *L*). But physical interactions/corrections are not neccessarily a BAD thing. They need to be appropriate for the particular dog .. in a way that avoids diminishing the relationship you have with your dog. That CAN be done. And I understand why many on here discourage physical corrections, because often people don't have the knowledge to fully gauge how their dogs are reacting. You're far better off making mistakes using positive reinforcement than punishment.
By the way .. in all honesty I would say that the percentage of people on here who balance +R with +P is quite a bit higher than estimated .. they are just not as willing to speak up because of the reactions they get. And that's kind of sad because when they're driven away from here they'll just go to a forum that encourages them to use corrections .. and that surely goes against what many on here want to do. Pushing them away doesn't help their dogs ..
Okay, all done ..
Melanie and the gang in Alaska
Yep....BIG HUGE difference between slapping a dog, bouncing a hose off of him in play and hitting a dog with a stick as punishment, half drowning a dog and choking a dog until it passes out. These are NOT simply different training methods. THIS IS ABUSE. Why don't people get it??????? Are there really people who don't know right from wrong, who don't know a correction from abuse? Or play from abuse? Is it ALL a big grey area to you? Are people like this MR people who deserve respect because they simply have a different method? Come on! Get real.
Jammies. I've read your posts. It appears that you don't use these harsh corrections on your dog. That is good. You see how you don't have to. There are even ways to deal with so called "hard" dogs without being hard on them. It's done all the time. You seem like a loving dog owner. Why not find a trainer who is not so shady like this MR. Even if you don't go all positive, there are trainers who don't use such harsh aversives. My hope would be that dog owners would really, really research +R...not just half way and then say it doesn't work. It does take some study and practice, like anything else. But it does work to produce such better dogs. I know. I've trained both ways....never extremely harsh, but still, much more compulsive than now. The difference is phenomenal....like night and day how much better +R is when all the ducks are in a row and steps and things aren't left out or incorrectly presumed. (which happens a lot with people.)
I do stand by what I said, people who love dogs should not be supporting MR and his underhandedness. It can really hurt your own soul in the long run.
I do stand by what I said, people who love dogs should not be supporting MR and his underhandedness. It can really hurt your own soul in the long run.
Obviously if an IP check determines it's the same person, they should be treated as the same person. But was that true for every newbie who came here? I am dubious.
They may not have read his book and realize he supports those things. They may not realize there are better ways to train. They may think his way is the "normal" way to train dogs. After all, fifty years ago physical corrections WERE the accepted way to train dogs.
I'm not saying it was right because it was accepted. But I am saying that if you stand back and look at the situation from the perspective of the people listening to this guy, you will better understand why they follow him in the first place. And if you understand that, you'll better understand how to show them there are better ways. And the more calmly you reply to them, the more likely they are to actually listen to what you're saying. Most people stop listening when people insult them.
When I got my dog, my dad wanted to build a doghouse and have her sleep outside. Was it because he's mean and heartless? No, it was because he grew up on a farm with the idea that big dogs hate being indoors and would much rather be outside than "cooped up". Should I have shouted at him, "You are so cruel, you don't care about dogs!!!"? That wouldn't have done a bit of good because he DID care about dogs. It was just that what he thought was best for the dog was not best for the dog, nor was it what the dog prefered. When he saw that my dog prefered being inside, he stopped suggesting that she live outside.
Hitting a dog is bad, but if you drive people off by insulting them, they leave and go on hitting their dog. If you politely counter their arguments and let them stay, maybe they will stay and stop hitting their dog.
Positive reinforcement works with people as well as dogs.
They may not have read his book and realize he supports those things. They may not realize there are better ways to train. They may think his way is the "normal" way to train dogs. After all, fifty years ago physical corrections WERE the accepted way to train dogs.
I'm not saying it was right because it was accepted. But I am saying that if you stand back and look at the situation from the perspective of the people listening to this guy, you will better understand why they follow him in the first place. And if you understand that, you'll better understand how to show them there are better ways. And the more calmly you reply to them, the more likely they are to actually listen to what you're saying. Most people stop listening when people insult them.
When I got my dog, my dad wanted to build a doghouse and have her sleep outside. Was it because he's mean and heartless? No, it was because he grew up on a farm with the idea that big dogs hate being indoors and would much rather be outside than "cooped up". Should I have shouted at him, "You are so cruel, you don't care about dogs!!!"? That wouldn't have done a bit of good because he DID care about dogs. It was just that what he thought was best for the dog was not best for the dog, nor was it what the dog prefered. When he saw that my dog prefered being inside, he stopped suggesting that she live outside.
Hitting a dog is bad, but if you drive people off by insulting them, they leave and go on hitting their dog. If you politely counter their arguments and let them stay, maybe they will stay and stop hitting their dog.
Positive reinforcement works with people as well as dogs.
Boemy, I don't know if you have read past threads which were made to one of his followers, but I had near unending patience and politeness toward this person. I wrote out long explanations of how a particular method could work and what the detrimental side effects of excessive punishment are. I wrote post after post, being patient and expaining. And so did other people. Ask other people here if you didn't see them. It was all for nothing. If these people don't know what this character stands for after reading these threads, seeing near quotes from his own book, seeing his own words, then they are blind. If they don't know that striking a dog with a stick or squeezing his neck in a choke collar until he gags or passes out is mistreatment, then what's wrong? Why is that something that is so hard to grasp? Why is it so hard to understand that if someone can do those things to a dog and feel all right about it, then they are not likely to be drawn to positive methods. If it doesn't bother their conscience in the least when they strike their dog or hurt his throat and neck, (and it doesn't or they wouldn't continue doing it) then what is going to cause them to turn away from that and turn toward purely humane treatment? When they say that not hitting a dog or not correcting a dog harshly enough is abuse, (and that WAS said) how on earth are you going to modify that mind set???
Supporting and defending this jerk is not only going to hurt those who have a conscience, but hurt other dogs because they help enable him to continue with other dogs. People need to take a stand against abuse and mistreatment of animals, stop making excuses for it, stop tolerating it, stop enabling the abusers.
Supporting and defending this jerk is not only going to hurt those who have a conscience, but hurt other dogs because they help enable him to continue with other dogs. People need to take a stand against abuse and mistreatment of animals, stop making excuses for it, stop tolerating it, stop enabling the abusers.
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,947
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 36
I see with what you're saying, and agree, BUT, richling's little minions came here only to support his methods and theories, and when presented with an alternative way of training, laughed and insulted the positive trainers and their methods, even when it was PROVEN that it worked.
Ah anyways, they're like a moth to a flame. Now that the flame is banned, maybe the moths will go elsewhere (and people who are genuinely interested in learning will get the help they need.)
I for one am sick of them and reading their schlock.
Great post as usual, Doberluv. And yes, you have put an amazing amount of effort into trying to change the views of those neanderthals. Too bad it fell on deaf ears.
Ah anyways, they're like a moth to a flame. Now that the flame is banned, maybe the moths will go elsewhere (and people who are genuinely interested in learning will get the help they need.)
I for one am sick of them and reading their schlock.
Great post as usual, Doberluv. And yes, you have put an amazing amount of effort into trying to change the views of those neanderthals. Too bad it fell on deaf ears.
This is so silly. Purdue is definitely NOT Martin, nor is she his son. She is young, new to training and having a wonderful time with her dog. Let's call it youthful exuberance. This training is indeed very physical and demanding, on handler and dog, and when you have completed a day of training you truly feel you and your dog have accomplished quite a feat. It is so amazing to see middle-aged housewives out there doing things I'm sure they would never have dreamed of before. That is what has gotten so out of control. The majority of the students are just everyday people. Two years ago we trained a deaf Chihuahua...right alongside the Rottweilers and Mastiffs. Customizing is the key...to each dog and his particular situation. There are first time dog owners and police officers training side by side. We all love our dogs very much and not one of us would tolerate our dogs being abused in any form. Can Martin be like a junkyard dog...absolutely and his people skills at times are totally missing in action. He doesn't care. Love him or hate him he is phenomonal in his ability to look at a dog and tell the handler how to get the maximum the dog has to give out of it. I know many here do not want to hear anything positive about this man but the dogs love him and his first concern is the dog. I'm sure some in here will discount this, so be it. Something else I don't think is understood...Martin very rarely steps in and actually handles a dog. This happens only under circumstances where a handler or another dog is in danger. He takes dogs no other trainer in our area will even attempt to handle and even some vets will send dogs to him as that dogs last chance. Turned in to a shelter these dogs would definitely be euthanized and labeled as unadoptable. And no, the dog is not bloodied or maimed in any way (LOL)
Now, please do not accuse me of being Martin. I apprenticed under him for over four years and am very proud to have completed his trainer school and to have had him shake my hand, call me a trainer and let me take his field as such. He makes you work very hard for that title and the first rule of this training is "you must be fair." This only applies to the dog, however, people are not his concern. Also, I did try purely positive training and it failed my dog miserably. I truly feel that exuberant pet and praise is a wonderful form of "positive reinforcement." I have even taught my dog to do a silly "dance of joy" when we accomplish something very difficult. Oh yeah, we are badasses!
Now, please do not accuse me of being Martin. I apprenticed under him for over four years and am very proud to have completed his trainer school and to have had him shake my hand, call me a trainer and let me take his field as such. He makes you work very hard for that title and the first rule of this training is "you must be fair." This only applies to the dog, however, people are not his concern. Also, I did try purely positive training and it failed my dog miserably. I truly feel that exuberant pet and praise is a wonderful form of "positive reinforcement." I have even taught my dog to do a silly "dance of joy" when we accomplish something very difficult. Oh yeah, we are badasses!
Yes, there were a lot of helpful, positive posts. I wasn't suggesting there weren't any. But there was also a lot of rhetoric.
We have people on the board who used to use the "old methods" and changed. We have people who used to be BYBs, too. People are complex, it's not as easy as "this group is full of goodness and laughter, whereas that group is full of evil and bile." A lot of people do the wrong thing for the right reason. Some people are cruel because they enjoy being cruel, other people are cruel out of ignorance.
I'm on many message boards, most of which are not dog boards. You get people asking questions about training their dog or asking for suggestions in dealing with their cat's inappropriate peeing and a lot of times they will talk about "spanking" their dog or pushing the cat's nose into its mess. Or other people will SUGGEST those methods. They don't hate their pets. They aren't mean or intentionally cruel people. It's just that that's how they think of "training" . . . hitting, punishing. Martin Ritchling is merely an exaggeration of this attitude. He probably seems moreso on this board, because most people here have a basic grasp of positive training, clickers, etc. But he's really just a "normal" dog training attitude cubed, I'm afraid.
I agree that a lot of his students were just plain trolls, but arguing with trolls only encouarges them. You have to treat them like you would a jumping dog . . . ignore them completely. There's nothing they hate more than being ignored.
We have people on the board who used to use the "old methods" and changed. We have people who used to be BYBs, too. People are complex, it's not as easy as "this group is full of goodness and laughter, whereas that group is full of evil and bile." A lot of people do the wrong thing for the right reason. Some people are cruel because they enjoy being cruel, other people are cruel out of ignorance.
I'm on many message boards, most of which are not dog boards. You get people asking questions about training their dog or asking for suggestions in dealing with their cat's inappropriate peeing and a lot of times they will talk about "spanking" their dog or pushing the cat's nose into its mess. Or other people will SUGGEST those methods. They don't hate their pets. They aren't mean or intentionally cruel people. It's just that that's how they think of "training" . . . hitting, punishing. Martin Ritchling is merely an exaggeration of this attitude. He probably seems moreso on this board, because most people here have a basic grasp of positive training, clickers, etc. But he's really just a "normal" dog training attitude cubed, I'm afraid.
I agree that a lot of his students were just plain trolls, but arguing with trolls only encouarges them. You have to treat them like you would a jumping dog . . . ignore them completely. There's nothing they hate more than being ignored.
I would like to address this if I may. By the very term "handler" we are in a physical realm. The dog is taught by physical repetition. With a dog new to training it is physically placed in position, say for sit. We actually put hands on the dog (not in some hideous forceful way) and "place" him in the sit. If a dog is docile it is no more than a hand on the chest/neck area and one on his rump to roll him back into the sit position. You do not push the dog into the position since this can be uncomfortable for them. It goes like this "(dog's name), command (sit) and then placed. This is done firmly and PATIENTLY. Name, command, place. Obviously if you have a very wiggly little puppy this can be a challenge. Ha Ha There is NEVER a correction in any form...you physically place the dog. It is very quick and he is not expected to maintain the position for any length of time.
I used to train horses and the principles are the same. They learn by the physical repetition of the body, leg or rein in the same place/position over and over.
I used to train horses and the principles are the same. They learn by the physical repetition of the body, leg or rein in the same place/position over and over.
I appreciate your concern but truly, whatever Martin is, he is first and foremost my friend. Well, more like an obnoxious brother at times and can certainly stir things up and then let the chips fall where they may. Do all of us agree with him all of the time...absolutely not. We are not robots and no one has butted heads with this man more than me. Also, I would never teach in a manner I thought unfair, abusive or cruel in any way. I just know I have seen and helped teach hundreds of dogs with him and on the field I feel no one is more fair to a dog. If this is disappointing to you I really don't know how to address that.
To me it is a lot like the Bill Clinton years. Many people revere him and long for him to be back in office. His actions outside the political arena put aside because they felt he was a wonderful President. So, whatever Martin is or isn't off that training field does not impact that dog or that student. I am not saying this is the correct point of view, just a fact of life.
To me it is a lot like the Bill Clinton years. Many people revere him and long for him to be back in office. His actions outside the political arena put aside because they felt he was a wonderful President. So, whatever Martin is or isn't off that training field does not impact that dog or that student. I am not saying this is the correct point of view, just a fact of life.
Actually, the goal of our training is NO equipment. My dog has not needed a collar of any kind since he was nine months old. He wears one now only when he has to be "dressed up" to go in public. His manners and obedience are impeccable with/without equipment. The dogs are actually starting to be weaned off equipment altogether at the intermediate level.
I also have a Jack Russell at the same level. She is 12 pounds of totally adorable!
I also have a Jack Russell at the same level. She is 12 pounds of totally adorable!
T
What you describe is molding. Read any book on behavior and training, classical and conditional reinforcement, etc etc.. and you will begin to understand that molding, no matter if done patiently, just isn't all that great of a method in order to teach a behavior. It is extremely limited on what it can teach. Sure, you can force a dog into a sitting position through molding, force, and manipulation, but can you teach with the same methods to turn on a light switch, to sneeze on command, to open a door?
If you are speaking ONLY of the force method/use of molding to teach a dog to sit on command..sure, not abuse.. but is it the best way to teach? We as trainers shouldn't be asking CAN we do something, but instead WHY do we do something. Why? If there's a better way, why not do it that way. If there's no better way, than you might as well be dead, because it is my understanding that we've been learning, improving, and advancing in everything from medicine to government since the beginning of time. Who's to say we cannot advance, learn, and improve in our dog training skills and methods?
If you are speaking ONLY of the force method/use of molding to teach a dog to sit on command..sure, not abuse.. but is it the best way to teach? We as trainers shouldn't be asking CAN we do something, but instead WHY do we do something. Why? If there's a better way, why not do it that way. If there's no better way, than you might as well be dead, because it is my understanding that we've been learning, improving, and advancing in everything from medicine to government since the beginning of time. Who's to say we cannot advance, learn, and improve in our dog training skills and methods?