Working Dog Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 200 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,307 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
Mike, what you hear from others about the table is what they precieve it to be if they hadn't seen it done. Now if they have seen it done and it's not done the way I do it then I can understand how they would feel about it. I'm NOT the best and don't claim to be but as in all training you have to do what the dog will let you do. If you force anything on the dog you're just asking for trouble. That's counter productive and I agree.
 
Joined
·
303 Posts
Of course dogs have got to bite anywhere, i.e. on top of tables, trucks, cars wherever whatever the handlers will it, but what is it exactly one tries to achieve in table training?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,869 Posts
Jerry, your thoughts and explinations are much apprieciated. Your's is quite different from what has been explained (not seen) to me in the past. I'm still curious about why the table is used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Jerry....I agree with you. I have been using the table for about ten years. Just like anything else it can be abused and I have seen dogs worked on the table that should not have been anywhere near a table or bitework in general. If the dog does not have fight/defense then the table should not be used. You can not develop what nature has not put into the dog at birth. I use the table with some of my sport dogs and practically all of my police dogs. Here are the following reasons why I like it as opposed to using a back tie and working fight/defense on the ground :

1 - It elevates the dog so I can come in from under the dog which is less preasure then over the top of the dog.

2 - It allows me to get within six inches of the dogs mouth during civil agitation. I can call the dog's "bluff" and get up close and personal.

3 - If I need to grab the dogs paw or fur to make myself a threat I can without getting bit (most of the time :lol: ).

4 - It is easier to work targeting if the dog is elevated. I can work inside bites and back bites much easier then if the dog is on the ground. I will often put a younger dog on the table and simply work arm pit bites over and over again prior to working them on the ground. It is easier on the dog as well as me. When I do this I am not working the dog in fight/defense. I am simply working on targeting.

Like Jerry has said....Our dogs run and jump on the table. They like it because when done correctly they win in every session. I train police dogs so it is imperative that I do everything that I can to insure that the dog will engage a suspect on his first couple of bites...an officer's life may count it. The table helps me insure that the dog is not just about equipment but has a fight/defense side that is willing to bite a person without equipment and without movement.

Gregg
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,728 Posts
Not a big fan of the table, but like Gregg said, anything can be abused. At best I watched a bunch of dogs get worked on the table like you would in normal training. Easier on the back. At the worst, hysterical screaming and thrashing, with the anal glands exploding.

I could see it if you were the only decoy for a large number of dogs, and you wanted a break from the normal decoying to be a bit easier on your back. For what I do, this has no purpose what so ever.

As far as defense, if you have to add it to a PS dog, what is up with the dog? Is it really good enough to be a PSD??? Even dumb dogs eventually figure out you are not gonna cross that line. Just curious what people using the table here think, and how it worked.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Jeff -

Yes, we select dogs because they have fight/defense but if you give a dog 1000 bites with equipment in training and then send them on thier first street bite on a passive suspect without equipment the dog may naturally have problems engaging. I think a police dog trainer that does not work a dog in defense/fight on a regular basis is setting a young street dog up for failure. It has been my experience that some dogs are much more prey oriented. Those are the dogs that I work more regularly on the table until they have gotten a few bites on the street.

Just because the dog has some natural fight/defense does not mean that you dont tap into it and make the dog confident in that particular drive. It is all about balance. I like to keep a balance between prey and fight/defense.

I dont understand you statement about dumb dogs figuring out that you are not going to cross the line? :?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,751 Posts
Mike: defense to me is the other side of wanting to flight but can´t. So dog is scared and can´t get away. Biting out of fear, not because it wants to bite. In dutch: angst agressie. (fear agression?)

The way Jerry and Gregg explains the use of the table it is just another way of aggitation like on a poal. That way I don´t have any troubles with it.

Usually my dogs learn to bite on prey drive (and some are serious from a very young age, so we pass the stage of prey) when they´re on the suit the get to realize they bite a man, then they get more serious. It is a natural thing, they get more real by aggression out of wanting to dominate (or fight drive..aaawww touchy subject..)
Some sportdogs (my malinois by example) don´t ever realize they´re biting a man, and if they knew they hurt someone they would never took a bite, they do it out of preydrive..´cause they like the game.

If you see the vids I have posted recently working my young dog you´ll see that is still preydrive.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,728 Posts
Quote:I dont understand you statement about dumb dogs figuring out that you are not going to cross the line?

I am talking about the line that designates the furthest point a dog can reach the guy working him, and the fact that all the dogs that I have seen worked this way in the past, all eventually figured out that you are NOT going to walk within their reach (general you, not YOU the person)

Quote:then send them on thier first street bite on a passive suspect

If he is passive, then why is the dog sent? I am not sure of the way you are using the term. Like passive, but armed? I am not sure how defense would come into play, as much as a conditioned response to bite when told would.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
Jose Alberto Reanto said:
Of course dogs have got to bite anywhere, i.e. on top of tables, trucks, cars wherever whatever the handlers will it, but what is it exactly one tries to achieve in table training?
Al, check out the links at the start of the thread, I think (I think) you are supposing that this is just another training environment for the dog...as all parties are referring to it in this thread, they are talking about a specific training apparatus (A small table or tables with a chain on them) used to provoke particular drive responses in a dog in a physical environment they can better control. I think that is a fair definition, based on how you all are describing it?.

So this is an excellent discussion! It made it through the night without anyone mentioning fight drive!!! :lol:

But anyway...those of you who are advocating table training seem to be (in my inexperience opinion) describing using it in a way that those who are against it are assuming it's used.

So...for those of you advocating table training...are you explicitly putting them up there to put them in defense or not? Just wondering.

I understand the notions of being lower than the dog, protecting one's own back, etc. but I thought the fundamental purpose of table training was to quickly put the dog into a high-stress environment to elicit serious amounts of defensive drive. And I still can't get past that there must be some fundamental adjustments the dog will make because it has four legs confined to a small, raised platform. Just like how I think playing hard tug with my dog on tile is more stressful for her than on grass (but at the same time, seems to make her focus on her grips more ?)

As always, I'm just reading what you all are posting, I have no experience with this myself. Really interesting thread, though! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
Woody Taylor said:
But anyway...those of you who are advocating table training seem to be (in my inexperience opinion) describing using it in a way that those who are against it are assuming it's used.
Sorry, this was unclear, I meant that the pro-'tablers' seem to be using the table to get benefits that the con-'tablers' either disregard or have not considered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Jeff -

The nice thing about the table is that I can occassionally cross the line and actually grab a paw or some fur. That makes the threat more real for the dog compared to a back tie where I cant get within a few feet of the dog. That, in my opinion, is one of the fundamental differences between the table and a back tie.

Police dogs bite a lot of passive suspects. Most of the time, the dog is deployed on a felony suspect that has fled the crime scene minutes or hours prior to the officers arriving on scene. The dog is used to locate the suspect that is usually hiding in a field or in a house/business. (the dogs are used to clear atics and under houses). Most of the time the suspect lays there motionless. For a young dog this can be difficult. the odor of the suspect is different. There is no movement nor equipment. If the suspect is in a small space such as an atic or crawl space this adds additional environmental preasures.

Woody - I agree with you. The table does put some environmental stress on the dog. This can help with channeling the dog into fight/defense (Sorry Woody.....I said the F-word :D ) easier. The table can be used for both fight/defense and prey (targeting and environmental exposure for a young dog).

Gregg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
Gregg Tawney said:
Woody - I agree with you. The table does put some environmental stress on the dog. This can help with channeling the dog into fight/defense (Sorry Woody.....I said the F-word :D ) easier. The table can be used for both fight/defense and prey (targeting and environmental exposure for a young dog).

Gregg
Would you all train your own dogs on tables? I mean, you act as the aggressor?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
As for me....no. If I am working fight/defense I would not put my own dog on the table. I think it would cause too much conflict for the dog and would be counter productive. My goal is at the end of a table session that the dog feels that he has backed me down and has kicked my butt. As you can see, that could cause some relationship problems with dogs that you live with.

I try not to channel dogs into fight/defense that I live with. I work my wife's sport dogs but I do mostly the prey stuff with them.

Selena - Have you seen or heard of anyone in the Netherlands using a table? Do you guys do civil agitation with your dogs?

Gregg
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
i think the major difference here is the dog, not the training. people like you know who hate the table because they've seen it used to bring a dog that wouldn't otherwise bite to a place where they will bite. basically taking a genetically inferior dog and forcing the dog to bite.

this isn't what gregg and jerry seem to be talking about. they're talking about making a strong dog stronger, not by "forcing them to bite", but by basically doing staked civil agitation with the benefit of the dog being elevated (beneficial to the dogs psyche and the decoy's back). while i've never seen it done, i wouldn't hesitate for a minute to put my dog on the table with gregg as the helper (one day hopefully i will)...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
Tim Martens said:
i think the major difference here is the dog, not the training...this isn't what gregg and jerry seem to be talking about. they're talking about making a strong dog stronger, not by "forcing them to bite", but by basically doing staked civil agitation with the benefit of the dog being elevated (beneficial to the dogs psyche and the decoy's back).
This is the part I can't get my hands around. Any positivity the dog gets out of being elevated would seem to be cancelled out by the fact that it's unsure of its footing and offset by its lack of escape routes. But Jerry and Gregg are also saying their dogs get psyched up to be put on the table, so perhaps you are right (I still think there is a fundamental notion of training that's different between the two groups, JMO) about it being keyed to particularly "fine" dogs.

So, having said that...Jerry and Glenn...do you all choose not to put up certain dogs on the table (do you test them for that "test") or do you put up any dog on the table and run the risk of breaking it?

This is not meant to be a confrontational question, I don't know, and I'm not sure I necessarily disagree with the notion of risking breaking dogs for particular applications (MWD, PSD) but that's probably an unpopular opinion. (I just kind of think you have to know in those types of dog roles...this is a whole thread of discussion in itself, I imagine).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
Woody Taylor said:
lack of escape routes.
this is where you are having trouble. again, i have not seen it done, and i don't have any first hand experience with this, so i'm just going off of regular training philosophies here....

escape routes don't play into it. again, a dog looking to escape is a weak dog. whether it be on a table or just staked out. if the footing was an issue for a dog the first time he/she was put on it, then i'm sure the next step would be some prey stimulation. some runaways with the sleeve, let the dog win the sleeve. you're not just going to start putting pressure on the dog if they're unsure of the environment. that goes for any training. table or otherwise. then once the dog gets comfortable you slowly begin to up the pressure.

so it's like any other training. you slowly build the dog up to the point where you can work them in whatever drive you want to.

is this right jerry, GREGG?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,307 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
We've all seen weak dogs and we know that this dog will not benefit by this training. BUT IF you start this weak dog off right he can overcome some of his problems. You have to work all dogs to see what it can take. Never would you want to put too much on a dog too soon. I'll even start dogs on the table that I think they may not be a good candidate by putting them up there and then taking them off. May do this many times to get a feel of the dog. If this dog still shows signs that he would be too weak for it then he don't go on it. If he seems comfortable with it then I'll start him slow. Some dogs get up there and buddy, they are ready and want you to bring it on. :lol:
It's like any training tool, if used right you won't go wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
Jerry Lyda said:
We've all seen weak dogs and we know that this dog will not benefit by this training. BUT IF you start this weak dog off right he can overcome some of his problems. You have to work all dogs to see what it can take. Never would you want to put too much on a dog too soon. I'll even start dogs on the table that I think they may not be a good candidate by putting them up there and then taking them off. May do this many times to get a feel of the dog. If this dog still shows signs that he would be too weak for it then he don't go on it. If he seems comfortable with it then I'll start him slow. Some dogs get up there and buddy, they are ready and want you to bring it on. :lol:
It's like any training tool, if used right you won't go wrong.
Hah, all the "against it" folks have stopped posting, I'm getting undue influence from Jerry on this now. :lol: :lol: This is the danger with an open forum...it needs CONSTANT VIGILANCE from all opinions!!! :D Where did everybody go???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,210 Posts
Woody Taylor said:
..........Hah, all the "against it" folks have stopped posting, I'm getting undue influence from Jerry on this now. :lol: :lol: This is the danger with an open forum...it needs CONSTANT VIGILANCE from all opinions!!! :D Where did everybody go???
LOL!

Perhaps they don't want to debate. I'm not speaking for anyone; I'm just guessing.

That doesn't mean others can't! This thread is going very well, considering the feelings I was afraid might erupt. Good group of civil writers, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
A good debate is healthy for a board. :) Keeps things interesting. Just ask my wife. :?

Tim you are right. We begin slowly with the dog. Like Jerry said, sometimes it may be as simple as putting the dog on the table and beginning your agitation from a 50 feet away. As you work closer to the dog you will see if the dog is insecure or weak. With a dog that is on the weaker side it may take me four or five sessions before I am within a few feet of the dog. If the dog does not have it then we dont try to put into the dog that which nature has not. There have been dogs that we decide to not work on the table becuase there is nothing to bring out. Those dogs are not police prospects. There are some dogs that have fight/defense but are insecure in that drive and by giving the dog some "wins" in that drive then they become stronger as a result. After you have the desired behaviour on the table then I bring them onto the ground and try to get the same intensity.

It is like other parts of training. There is no hurry. Take your time and reward the desired behaviour.

Gregg
 
21 - 40 of 200 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top