Running Contacts?

[Root Beer]

Not to change the subject - this is related! Would you make the same case against using weave wires and channels, etc. for weave poles? I'm really curious.

 

It has always seemed to me that it doesn't make sense to use weave wires because the weaves look different without them. Even if you fade them, you are still looking for a finished product that is very different from the training method used.

 

To me it seems that using weave wires (I focus on them in particular because they seem to be the weave training method of choice around here) is a lot like using a hoop to teach a contact. The dog can learn to go through the designated path within the wires, but in the end that has to be transferred to wireless weaves and the dog must really understand that the wires won't be there.

 

I don't discount muscle memory entirely. I know that there are behaviors that my dogs carry out without thinking about them. They are so learned that they are automatic. Kind of like if you play a musical instrument - after you practice enough, you don't think about how to play the individual notes and that's when you can start to really make music. I can see hoops and wires and so forth having a place with some dogs in the introductory stages of training, but in the long run, it seems that a lot of practice has to take place without those sort of things to really build that ability to carry out the behavior properly without the dog needing to think about it anymore.

[Rosanne]

I have seen wires work on weaves too, but when the club I was in used wires, they put them on a channel and used them as back up, so the dog really was just learning a channel. I think the difference with the weaves is that the dog must learn the striding/foot pattern no matter what method you use, but it seems to me that it takes longer with wires, since the dogs are more focused on "I can't get out of the weaves" instead of thinking "how do I go through them"

 

I have used 2by2's for years now. I think I have the first dog trained that way to do the 60-pole challenge, but that's unconfirmed. He was young so 14.1 was a pretty good time, but no records (he was maybe 22 months old, this was back in mid-2004)

I love 2by2's but I think some people get too caught up in training entries while they're still open, and take too long to add all the weaves once they are closed. Anyhow, yes, I definitely want to train in ways that keep the dog focused on the real obstacles, not props.

 

What I don't like about props is that when there IS a prop, the dog will focus on the prop. The only behavior the dog knows that he is learning is "go under/through the hoop". He doesn't KNOW he's supposed to learn "duck your head down". That's my beef with hoops. How do you tell your dog which part of that behavior is what you want? You can't. So essentially hoops (and weave wires) are just sort of teaching by preventing the wrong thing from happening at home.

 

Of course I acknowledge that dogs and people can learn things they don't have to think about. I AM typing after all

But I just don't like the term "muscle memory" because people tend to think that it is what it sounds like - a memory you can imprint on a dog's muscles by repeating something a lot. I don't really agree that you can fade hoops from contacts and still get the same behavior all the time - unlike weaves, where there's only one way to go through them properly, there are many ways to run down a ramp, and the dog has no real reference or reason to change his striding coming down.

Nobody has to listen to everything I say, but I believe rather passionately in what I'm talking about and have trained and helped train lots of dogs and seen many things go wrong, and I'm really just trying to stir some thoughts in people.

[quicksilver]

I use channel weaves to teach young dogs - but without guide wires.

 

As for contacts - my preferred method is small clicker target placed roughly a body length past the end of the DW or AF, giving a 4-off position. Thus running contacts each time. Lots of reinforcement in training, occasional in competition. My young BC Bliss has been competing for nearly 2 years now and has only missed 1 DW contact, and 0 AF ones, she normally does the DW in under 1.8 secs (so not flat out but fast enough). 4-on position for the SS of course.

 

Here's our latest run together, this morning at Olympia in London. Sadly I messed it up for her at the Aframe, pulling her back off it, she was lovely throughout though.

 

http://www.agilityvideos2.freeuk.com/blissolympiaweb.wmv

 

Hope you like it.

[Northof49]

I wasn't implying that you thought hoops were the only way to train.

 

I also just don't think that habits you form at home apply during the excitement of trials. I try to teach my dogs with the thought in mind that they WILL be more excited at trials and therefore I want to have either a command to remind them with, or be able to compensate in some other way (even if its babysitting) so they don't start leaping off. I really don't know any competitive dogs that have been trained with hoops, but then I don't know Canadian dogs so if there are great Canadian dogs who were trained that way, please excuse my ignorance.

\

 

But that which you train at home should hold up in trials if you have proofed it enough. That is also something that a lot of people lack in their training - throwing everything imaginable at the dog excitement wise. Stick a flyball box at the end of an Aframe , etc with a dog that loves flyball, and see what happens. Sheep work great too. If you want the sheep at the end of the arena, do the contacts correctly.

 

I also understand that some dogs can be quite different at a trial than training, but it also comes down to what a handler does in the ring. A friend of mine had a dog that didn't particularly like the training, but liked to perform for a crowd, so was much faster at a trial than she ever was when training, but her contact performance was maintained in the ring, because that what was insisted on. If youm(generic) let your contacts slide in the ring, that is what you are going to get - good contacts at home and crap in the ring. I see it all the time - the dogs gets the contact but doesn't perform the proper criteria and the handler accepts that because they want to go for the Q ribbon. I also get all the time "I just want to get through starters and advance and I'll work on my contacts when I get to Masters" Good luck to them - by that time they have wrecked their contacts and they don't get them back.

 

Too many times when I am asked do a distance seminar, I can't because the dogs can't do the contacts or weave poles independent of the handler. I get there, and no one's dogs can maintain their supposed criteria without the handler babysitting them.

 

The one thing that I have noticed, is overall our Canadian dogs can out gamble and out snooker American dogs. A lot of American handlers get through the games to get their titles and that's it. It's like the Ontario people, very few of them will ever do team or snooker once they have their Titles as they don't have a high enough Q rate in those areas. It's the opposite out in Western Canada. If you give them a choice of a full day of Standard or Snooker they will choose Snooker, and most of them don't play it safe - most go for the challenge of trying to do 4 sevens and completing the closing. So you may not have a high Q rate at some trials, but no one cares. It is rising to the challenge of seeing if you can Q with the 4 seven that is important, not playing it safe and Qing. Westerners also always continue to run team. If it's offered at a trial, everyone enters.

 

I am also a big believer in obstacle discrimination training, and think it is still relevant today. A lot of people tell me that you don't need it anymore because of how handling has improved and changed over the years, but to me it is still important. A lot of "traps" that people screw up from overhandling don't affect me because my dog's obstacle discrimination eliminates the problem. I don't have to "handle" these areas, I just have to name the obstacle I want my dog to take. And it sure comes in handy if you end up in a wrong position and your body language is going to screw your dog up.

[Rosanne]

Now don't get too cocky up there in Canada, my dog does 9/10 gambles that I run him in. There are lots of great gamble and snooker dogs down here. It's extremely rare to see a Masters Snooker won by someone who didn't do all 7's.

 

I would never put sheep by an agility ring. . . that's just mean. . . and I train on stock in my "spare time"

 

I don't believe in training for gamblers because I always expect my dogs to handle the same no matter what distance they are at. So that's an example of how I'm probably different from a lot of folks. I never train FOR gamblers, but my dogs almost always DO the gamble, so obviously what I do works. And don't even try to say American gambles are easy, because they aren't!

 

I've never competed in Canada but know a few people who drive up for AAC Nationals. Too long a drive for me. But unless you compete down here all the time, you probably shouldn't say "lots of American dogs"! I don't know more than 1 or 2 Canadian dogs, and I honestly have never competed in Canada so i would never make generalizations about the dogs up there. I bet the training and running styles are not that different.

[Rosanne]

The one thing that I have noticed, is overall our Canadian dogs can out gamble and out snooker American dogs. A lot of American handlers get through the games to get their titles and that's it.

 

And it sure comes in handy if you end up in a wrong position and your body language is going to screw your dog up.

 

I don't know anybody around here that stops entering a game altogether after getting that title. We have Lifetime Acheivement Awards in USDAA that require you to keep accumulating each class, so most people keep entering everything.

 

And of course, MY BODY never screws my dog up. I'm the perfect handler

I never try hard to teach my dogs verbal obstacle discriminations but they always seem to learn them by the time they're 3 or so anyway. Or they at least learn "Out X" versus "Come X"

[PSmitty]

I don't think this has been addressed, so I hope I'm not repeating anything. My question isn't so much about training a running contact, but what dogs should or shouldn't do running contacts. Is there a certain criteria that you guys follow? Like, this sort of dog should do a running contact, this one a 2o/2o, this one a 4 on the floor? I get that big dogs would be better off not doing a 2o/2o on the A-frame, but what else?

 

The reason I'm asking is, I was told once that I shouldn't train running contacts because my dog wasn't "fast enough".

[quicksilver]

In my experience running contacts are suitable for dogs of all speeds and sizes. The problem here in the UK is getting other handlers to be brave enough to move away from a 'quick release' 2o2o contact and even consider venturing out into the impressive but relatively unknown waters of the 4-off position. What I find needs to be varied from dog to dog is the exact position of the target from the end of the contact, 'dog's body length' is just a rough guide.

[Ace]

I didnt read the entire post, just the first few responses. If I did running contacts (which I think I might in the future) the only method I have ever seen to be flawless, is Silvia Trkman's method. Which can be found on her website here silvia.trkman.net She has a lot of nice training methods. Her running contact method takes a LONG time to master, so if you were looking for something quicker you might want to go with the hoop method.

 

Diane:)

[Root Beer]

I was talking to Maddie's instructor about her A-Frame yesterday. She has developed a sloppy habit of letting her rump slide off the contact once her feet hit the ground. Maddie isn't a dog that "nails" contacts, so the effect is kind of a floppy dog at the bottom of the contact. Just on the A-Frame, that is. Her dog walk contacts are fine.

 

My instructor asked if I'd like to work on a running A-Frame contact with her, and I think I'm going to. I think it will suit her style better, and I'm interested to learn more about this running contact!

[quicksilver]

I didnt read the entire post, just the first few responses. If I did running contacts (which I think I might in the future) the only method I have ever seen to be flawless, is Silvia Trkman's method. Which can be found on her website here silvia.trkman.net She has a lot of nice training methods. Her running contact method takes a LONG time to master, so if you were looking for something quicker you might want to go with the hoop method.

 

Yep, her Medium dog La has stunning running contacts. She's missing some with her Large collie Bu, though.

[soloagility]

I have just started retraining Solo's Aframe to a running contact. I think he found the 2o2o difficult, but with the running, he obviously loves it, and it seems much more comfortable and enjoyable to him. I'm using a tunnel at the bottom of the frame since I don't have hoops. So far, it's working quite well, hopefully it'll carry over when I remove the tunnel. Here is a picture of Solo flying over the top of the frame on the first day that I had him running it.

[mum24dog]

In my experience running contacts are suitable for dogs of all speeds and sizes.

 

I'm not sure about that.

Hazel has taught herself super running A frames and when she is in the right frame of mind) she can do the same with the DW. Her stride pattern is just right.

Eddie, although a similar size, is much shorter backed and less flexible (leggy JRT) and could never get the same type of action.

And it isn't just a case of speed and size. Temperament comes into it too.

Kye is a very wilful dog and needs to be under control at as many points of the course as possible otherwise he starts to think he knows best. 2o2o gives him specific reference points and keeps his independent streak under control.

He's also very leggy and his down is just not quick enough to train a 4o as you currently favour.

That's not to say I wouldn't try it with another dog that ran closer to the ground than he does.

I wish I'd done it deliberately with Hazel as her contacts would have been amazing but it was over 6 years ago and we were still using the "fingers crossed" method at the time.

 

Pam

[gilli and jago]

Hi guys

 

I’m also a fan of the 2on 2off I’m afraid. Not brave enough to try a 4off (although with Ludos shoulder OCD maybe I should have) and a running contact for him would be a no-no. His stride IS definitely too long.

 

I also trained him with channels and guide wires and although he’s only a baby his weaves are fast enough and consistent

 

Only thing I need to do now is get him a decent handler….