Root Beer Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 What's most interesting about this, to me, is that as recently as a year or so ago, she vehemently and loudly poo-poohed running contacts as being "not 100% reliable" and that 99% was not the same as 100% or something like that, so therefore running contacts would never be a real training methodology. I remember that! I was very surprised when I saw that she now has a running contact training program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald McCaig Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Dear Doggers, I don't train or compete in agility. I know nothing about Ms. Garrett but took a moment to visit her website. In her "puppy peakers" blog, she seems to think that a Border Collie puppy obsessing with a tug toy has overcome a powerful distraction (a dump truck). I did wonder why she thought the dumptruck was a distraction. Donald McCaig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretBC Posted January 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Some dogs would stress at the noise it makes (like my dog), some dogs might try to reactively chase it. To have a dog that will work/play through distractions that they find scary or exciting, and to focus on you, is harder than you'd think. My Secret, for example, will not play at agility trials. All of her training at home is done with toys, but she is still too stressed in the trial environment to let down her guard and play. She's too busy making sure the world is in order around her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcv-border Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 What's most interesting about this, to me, is that as recently as a year or so ago, she vehemently and loudly poo-poohed running contacts as being "not 100% reliable" and that 99% was not the same as 100% or something like that, so therefore running contacts would never be a real training methodology. Jeez, I wasn't going to comment, but I just can not control myself. I HAVE to put my 2 cents in. I remember hearing about her comments regarding the 'lack of reliability' of RCs. At the time I thought that she was asking for a phenomenally high level of performance, but then rationalized it by reasoning that her pursuit of perfection is one (of the MANY) differences between me and a world-class trainer/competitor. (I say some of this with tongue-in-cheek.) Since then, I have heard a few less than flattering anecdotes about SG and this thread has supplied a few more. Reliable weave-pole entries?? Ha Ha. People who live in glass houses...... A couple of things jumped out at me when I watched the vid. 1. I took issue with the statement at the beginning of the video that said: "Finally, a methodology that relies on criteria, not repetition" Really? Seriously? Good training technique generally requires holding strict criteria. SG is not the first one to use criteria when training RCs. Now I know that there are several methods for training RCS and I don't know them all, but I am rather familiar with Silvia Trkman's method. Her method is all about maintaining criteria, and when she trains her dogs, she says she doesn't require a lot of reps. In fact, when she is training her young dogs, she may train only once or twice a week for 5-10 reps. (This is according to a seminar I took last year when she came to the States.) The above statement in SG's video makes it sound like she has come up with a novel training technique. 2. SG also made a point later in the video about how she trained many of the skills needed for a RC away from the agility obstacles, rather than on them. I hate to sound like a broken record, but again, this is not a novel idea either. Silvia Trkman uses a lot of what she calls "trick training" (which she teaches away from the agility field) as a foundation for agility skills. There could be other famous agility trainers (Mecklenberg?, Peel?, D. Baumann?, etc.) that also use a similar approach, I just am not as familiar with them. Anyway, I am getting a big chuckle out of this topic. Thanks. I will be very interested to hear of the results of the 5 "chosen ones". Jovi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Since then, I have heard a few less than flattering anecdotes about SG and this thread has supplied a few more. Reliable weave-pole entries?? Ha Ha. People who live in glass houses...... I'm glad I'm not the only one who has not turned out to be entirely happy with her 2 X 2 method. I know I've praised it many times, but it is only recently that my 2 X 2 trained dog's weaves have developed some issues that I do suspect stem from aspects of the 2 X 2 training process and the way he is applying the information that he learned. Let me be clear - I am not blaming the method. I'm not blaming anyone or anything, actually. I have a pretty good idea of what has gone wrong and we are working on rebuilding his weave pole performance in a proactive way, but I have chosen not to go back to her method of 2 X 2's to retrain his weaves. And let me be clear - I am not dissing 2 X 2's. They absolutely have their use and I do still use them. There are also a lot of other ways to use them, other than Susan Garrett's exact method, and I'm finding that I prefer some of that variation. 1. I took issue with the statement at the beginning of the video that said: "Finally, a methodology that relies on criteria, not repetition" Really? Seriously? Good training technique generally requires holding strict criteria. SG is not the first one to use criteria when training RCs. Now I know that there are several methods for training RCS and I don't know them all, but I am rather familiar with Silvia Trkman's method. Her method is all about maintaining criteria, and when she trains her dogs, she says she doesn't require a lot of reps. In fact, when she is training her young dogs, she may train only once or twice a week for 5-10 reps. (This is according to a seminar I took last year when she came to the States.) The above statement in SG's video makes it sound like she has come up with a novel training technique. I noticed that, too!! Every running contact method I know of relies on criteria. Not all on the exact same criteria, but criteria nonetheless. I was watching her dog closely, trying to figure out exactly what criteria she has isolated. I am guessing that it might have something to do with the dog's position at the time when the directional cues are given. 2. SG also made a point later in the video about how she trained many of the skills needed for a RC away from the agility obstacles, rather than on them. I hate to sound like a broken record, but again, this is not a novel idea either. Silvia Trkman uses a lot of what she calls "trick training" (which she teaches away from the agility field) as a foundation for agility skills. There could be other famous agility trainers (Mecklenberg?, Peel?, D. Baumann?, etc.) that also use a similar approach, I just am not as familiar with them. The Rachel Sanders (spelling?) running contact method operates the same way. The foundation is trained on the ground, using a PVC box, and it is only transferred to the A-Frame once a certain point is reached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northof49 Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I'm glad I'm not the only one who has not turned out to be entirely happy with her 2 X 2 method. I know I've praised it many times, but it is only recently that my 2 X 2 trained dog's weaves have developed some issues that I do suspect stem from aspects of the 2 X 2 training process and the way he is applying the information that he learned. Let me be clear - I am not blaming the method. I'm not blaming anyone or anything, actually. I have a pretty good idea of what has gone wrong and we are working on rebuilding his weave pole performance in a proactive way, but I have chosen not to go back to her method of 2 X 2's to retrain his weaves. And let me be clear - I am not dissing 2 X 2's. They absolutely have their use and I do still use them. There are also a lot of other ways to use them, other than Susan Garrett's exact method, and I'm finding that I prefer some of that variation. I have really liked the 2 x 2 method, and I don't even like the woman, and we have helped re-train dogs to be really reliable on their entries. Having said that, the way Susan Garrett actually trains the 2x2 method, and what she has put out in her DVD are very different. Luckily a friend of mine knows exactly how Susan trains them, and she herself has trained a lot of dogs with the 2x2 method, so when we had to tweak for a problem we could just phone her and get what we needed. The funny thing about the running contacts is that you need so many hundres and hundres of repetitions on full height requipment that a lot of people are now of the opinion that the stress on the dog's body is greater than doing 2o2o. I can do lots of repetitions on 2o2o in just the bottom 2 feet of each contact obstacle, and I don't need hundreds and hundreds repetitions. As well, winning anwywere, including the World competitions has never been won with obstacle execution. It is done on the ground - tighter turns, tighter lines. Kim Collins, who coached the Canadian WAO 2011 team said it best. "agility is no longer about the obstacles, but the transition between obstacles". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've been tired of her since I first met her while auditing a seminar she taught in NC about 15 years ago. And just in case I had any doubt so many years later, I had the misfortune of sitting in front of her at Nationals and listening to her badmouth other competitors and go on and on about she (SG) was so much better and had much more influence because she was famous and all. GAG. Except she isn't "so much better" than a whole bunch of other agility competitors, is she? You just have to see her performance in the last FCI World Champs to see that - she's as fallible as anyone else at that level. She's much better at self promotion, that's all, and some people have more money than sense. We've got to the stage now when people just invent "new" methods of training whatever for the sake of it. And the more methods that are devised, the more apparent it becomes that noone has the monopoly on the best way to train or handle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Root Beer Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I have really liked the 2 x 2 method, and I don't even like the woman, and we have helped re-train dogs to be really reliable on their entries. Having said that, the way Susan Garrett actually trains the 2x2 method, and what she has put out in her DVD are very different. Luckily a friend of mine knows exactly how Susan trains them, and she herself has trained a lot of dogs with the 2x2 method, so when we had to tweak for a problem we could just phone her and get what we needed. I would be interested to know the differences. It may be what is "missing" from what I got off the DVD. I do like the 2 X 2 method and I'm not sorry I tried it, and I will certainly use pieces of it in future weave training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smalahundur Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 If you know this, I beg pardon, but the first thing to know is that on the A-Frame, Dog Walk, and Teeter, there is a rule that the dog must get at least one paw into the yellow zone at the bottom of the down side of the equipment. The purpose of this is to avoid having dogs flying off too high up. Traditionally, this has been trained by teaching a "contact behavior" where the dog goes to the bottom and stops, usually with front paws on the ground and back paws on the equipment. This is called "2 on 2 off". That isn't the only way to do it. Some teach a four on, some do "one rear toe on", and some teach a stop on the ground at the bottom. It has become popular in recent years to not have the dog stop at all, but run right through the contact zone. That's a "running contact". But one must still teach most dogs to run into the yellow zone because many dogs, as they get excited, will fly off above the yellow. So, there are different ways to teach the dog to get at least a paw into the yellow, while running through the contact zone. Thanks for your clear answer, I don´t know anything of agility, and was curious what this expensive course was about. It seems a very steep price indeed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcv-border Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 The funny thing about the running contacts is that you need so many hundres and hundres of repetitions on full height requipment that a lot of people are now of the opinion that the stress on the dog's body is greater than doing 2o2o. I can do lots of repetitions on 2o2o in just the bottom 2 feet of each contact obstacle, and I don't need hundreds and hundreds repetitions. As well, winning anwywere, including the World competitions has never been won with obstacle execution. It is done on the ground - tighter turns, tighter lines. Kim Collins, who coached the Canadian WAO 2011 team said it best. "agility is no longer about the obstacles, but the transition between obstacles". I have to disagree with the hundreds and hundreds of repetitions to train RCS (at least the way that I was introduced to how to train RCs) and whether or not there is more stress on a dog's body when training RCs vs. 2020, but that is a topic for another time. IMHO, I think the most appropriate training method (RCs, 2020, four on the floor, early release, etc.) should be based on the unique attributes of each agility team - both dog and human. I am not invested in any one training method. Whatever works is good with me. I just wish I knew a priori which method would work best for us. I agree that the more important aspect of agility is the tight turns and tight lines. The RCs are just the flashy part. I really like the quote from Kim Collins. I will definitely remember it. Jovi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rave Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've found the 2x2 method she sells to be severely lacking and maybe it is the omitted information. Not too impressed with it as it is; I'm now having to retrain my dog using a different method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rave Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Except she isn't "so much better" than a whole bunch of other agility competitors, is she? You just have to see her performance in the last FCI World Champs to see that - she's as fallible as anyone else at that level. She's much better at self promotion, that's all, and some people have more money than sense. We've got to the stage now when people just invent "new" methods of training whatever for the sake of it. And the more methods that are devised, the more apparent it becomes that noone has the monopoly on the best way to train or handle. Oh I agree, I wasn't saying she was better, SHE was. I was trying not to gag out loud. She was also EXTREMELY jealous of Daisy Peel and lashing out because someone had complimented Daisy and not her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've found the 2x2 method she sells to be severely lacking and maybe it is the omitted information. Not too impressed with it as it is; I'm now having to retrain my dog using a different method. Of all the obstacles where training is over complicated, weaves come way out on top. We have some brilliant weavers in our club - taught by luring in no time at all by agility newbies, and yes, they can get difficult entries. We don't have a house style of weave training - just whatever the handler can get their head round and suits the dog. I've come to the conclusion over the years that a dog that lacks motivation or is particularly uncoordinated would probably benefit from channel or V weaves, but most dogs that want to work end up with pretty much the same result whichever way they are taught as long as long the handler has a clear idea of what they want the end result to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Oh I agree, I wasn't saying she was better, SHE was. I know - I was addressing her conceit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald McCaig Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Dear Doggers, When I wondered why Ms. Garrett would consider a dumptruck a distraction, Ms. SecretBC replied: "Some dogs would stress at the noise it makes (like my dog), some dogs might try to reactively chase it. To have a dog that will work/play through distractions that they find scary or exciting, and to focus on you, is harder than you'd think." Well, er . . . . If they see/hear them. I have had sheepdogs run into two foot thick trees while working. Fulltilt. I have had them knock me flat. Everyone has heard of the dog that ran under a Perfectly Visible SUV while chasing a ball. Border Collies have a ferocious focus. When one focuses on a toy/treat/ball/tug/running child/treat heaven itself isn't able to distract them. As doubtless Ms. Garrett knows. So why this brag about an invisible dumptruck? Donald McCaig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 So why this brag about an invisible dumptruck? Donald McCaig Maybe the brag was about how she got the dog to focus on the tuggy to that extent. Yes, BCs do have unbreakable focus on some things at some times but it isn't a given that playing tug will always be one of those things unless it has been encouraged and the dog is that way inclined. Could be that something else in the environment has a stronger pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretBC Posted January 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've been curious to know if Susan would leave the video link up considering how much controversy and uproar her announcement caused (seriously, there were numerous different conversations started on facebook about this). Just clicked the link at the top of this post and it now says: "Sorry Folks, We can't accept any more applicants. Thanks for your interest! We have more than enough applicants into the program, now the task of selecting only 5!" Wow, so.... Really? Never fear, though, because you can still get on the e-mail list to be notified of future openings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Good Shepherd Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Wow Why did I sign up for a beginning agility class with my Elsie all I want to do is have fun with my dog away from sheep, get her out more and just sort of hang out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcv-border Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 I've been curious to know if Susan would leave the video link up considering how much controversy and uproar her announcement caused (seriously, there were numerous different conversations started on facebook about this). Just clicked the link at the top of this post and it now says: "Sorry Folks, We can't accept any more applicants..... Oh, Darn. I emailed an agility friend about this topic, and I am sure she hasn't had time to check out the YouTube video. Oh well, no great loss. Jovi **Still getting a chuckle out of this whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcv-border Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Dear Doggers, When I wondered why Ms. Garrett would consider a dumptruck a distraction, Ms. SecretBC replied: "Some dogs would stress at the noise it makes (like my dog), some dogs might try to reactively chase it. To have a dog that will work/play through distractions that they find scary or exciting, and to focus on you, is harder than you'd think." Well, er . . . . If they see/hear them. I have had sheepdogs run into two foot thick trees while working. Fulltilt. I have had them knock me flat. Everyone has heard of the dog that ran under a Perfectly Visible SUV while chasing a ball. Border Collies have a ferocious focus. When one focuses on a toy/treat/ball/tug/running child/treat heaven itself isn't able to distract them. As doubtless Ms. Garrett knows. So why this brag about an invisible dumptruck? Donald McCaig Although there has been much cynicism (sp?) displayed regarding this latest venture by SG (and I am guilty too), to be fair.....SG runs BCs but trains many different breeds/types of dogs (i.e. the handler and the dog are trained by SG). Thus, not only are some BCs more easily distracted, but she has to develop methods that work for and/or are adaptable to many different personality types. I agree that the 'dumptruck distraction' in her video was pretty minor for a hyper-focused BC (which I am guessing might be a good description of Swagger). For some dogs, just moving a little bit or trying more lateral distance is a huge distraction. IMO, it would have been more believable if she provided a major* distraction and the dog still performed. (*major - as defined relative to the tolerance level of the dog). Jovi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rave Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 LOVE this blog about it.. http://blog.teamsmalldog.com/2012/01/team-small-dog-is-going-to-make-you.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcv-border Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 Uh -- just had a thought. Is it $5000 US or $5000 Canadian? I am wasting tooo much time here. Jovi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretBC Posted January 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 OMG, love that blog post. Jovi, I don't know that she specified.... What is the exchange rate at the moment? I assume our dollar still sucks, so it is more than $5000. Previously, I'm fairly sure that her prices have been in CA $. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSmitty Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 LOVE this blog about it.. http://blog.teamsmalldog.com/2012/01/team-small-dog-is-going-to-make-you.html Awesome. Also, I want a "Yell Louder, Run Faster" shirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rave Posted January 31, 2012 Report Share Posted January 31, 2012 While I enjoying laughing at her expense, I am reminded of a dog wanting attention in that negative attention is still attention. Even so, I'm all for a collar correction in this case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.