So what was taught during this time? You say gross aspect ob, what does. That mean to you. What is 10 weeks in sessions? Once a week? 3 times a day?Contrary to what Mr. Barriano believes, KMODT is far from obsolete. It is in fact very relevant in both application and results. Its goal is off leash reliability. That, you will get if you adhere to the method within the proscribed 10 weeks.
I took my high drive Mal through the 10 week method before I did anything else. There were no e-collars, prongs, toys or tugs or treats or bites. Just the leash, the choke collar, the dog and me with my praise. We got to off-leash in ten weeks with a solid recall with distractions.
After that I started incorporating all the other training aids mentioned above, and began bite work.
You will get reliable gross aspect obedience with kmodt. If your dog is for PP, like mine is, its just what you need. You can certainly train with other methods after laying in the KMODT foundation.
You will not get that kind of tight attention heeling with KMODT. That's probably why Mr Barriano deems it obsolete, he must have some kind of sport dogs. And he likes them to have that prancy google eyed look, when he takes them out of their pens, to train them, or to trial them, or to show them to people he's trying to sell them to. Is that right Mr. Barriano?
+1 to that.Hhhhhmmmm, I do my fair share of working with lower drive dogs as well as dogs that have been inhibited by incorrectly applied compulsion training. Marker training is highly effective with those type of dogs. I don't see how the decision of whether to apply marker or Koehler methods as one based on drive levels, at all.
If anything, what I often hear is that clicker training only works with "soft" or "low drive" dogs, not the reverse. Whether or not this is true is not something I would know, personally, since (again) I don't think I've ever worked with a "hard" or "high drive" dog. But that's a thing people often tell me.
That's kind of the feeling I get, but since I've never done it, I don't actually KNOW, and therefore I think it's more prudent for me to be cautious about saying so. ;-)uh.... someone lied to you. I own 'hard' and 'high drive' dogs and use clickers/markers. You'll talk to 3 trainers and get 5 different opinions on which way is correct :lol:. If clicker training appeals to you... do that.
And high drive dogs don't run into competing motivators or distractions? Do you all really think you need a prey slave to be able to train reliability? Regardless of drives, rewards or motivators should be something the dog really desires. I work with all sorts of so called drive levels and with any of them the trick is to find what motivates them to perform the work. An important part of this is the dog's relationship with the handler.Imo low drive dogs require more compulsion to achieve reliable obedience under distraction. If the dog has less motivation to have what you have what do you think will happen to the reliability when you run into competing motivators? Thats been my experience anyways.
Perhaps like anything else Koehler works well with certain types of dog and not so well with others?
I think people used to "praise" their dogs in training, when they did something well, many times that praise was also associated with some sort of reward, and also physical release as well. I also think people used to use verbal or physical "signals" that were used to relay to the dog that he is not doing things correctly, in place of, or prior to some form of correction. Long before "marker training" was a popular term. I think many dog trainers use many methods that are common knowledge to the community, and few label something as their own method, or system.Koehler dog training works. The aesthetic is not very good. But done correctly, you can achieve reliable behaviors. Koehler is strictly a pressure avoidance and positive punishment system. I don't know where the 'marker' comment is coming from.
Efficacy is not enough, to me. If it can be trained through positive reinforcement, then I feel a moral obligation to do so. I try to use compulsion only where my R+ training has failed. That's my moral compass in dog training, but everyone is different.
I'll take a stab at this for the sake of discussion, but please note (again) that I'm a relative newbie and will of course defer to those with more experience and better accomplishments.Is there an official Marker Training system?
I think of it as a philosophy that can be applied to many areas of training, not an actual specific system. I do see the obvious differences in certain phases of training, like teaching.
Are there not corrections used in marker training systems?
Who innovated the "marker training system"?