Doing It All – My Rule of Three

Doing It All – My Rule of Three

At a recent field training session, I watched a relatively new person working with her dogs at both Senior and Master level training setups. We don’t train together frequently, but over time I have noticed that basic obedience work (i.e., heeling to the line and sitting still until sent) is no better than it was three months ago. Hmm. What’s going on here? I have lots of ideas and have offered ideas in the past to help her. The piece of this puzzle that I want to focus on here is training methodology. Often, situations like this may be related to a relationship issue, but that’s another discussion. I can relate to this scenario with my dogs as I have had similar experiences, so I have created a “Rule of Three” for myself to help me better manage learning or discipline problems with dogs.

When I am training dogs, no matter the venue, the rule simply states: My dogs like simple. If the method I am using does not promote learning for that dog (even a little change counts) after three tries, get creative and try something else. If I am working with a trained dog who chooses not to comply with a command, I use the Rule of Three to modify my corrections to facilitate better dog decisions. I prefer to correct with the mildest action that works; meaning, if I try to correct a dog verbally three times without success, I switch to a mild physical correction next. Failure to change behavior with three tries changes my response again from a mild physical correction (i.e., grabbing a dog’s collar to make him sit) to an action more aversive, until the dog understands that the choice he made was not correct. Fuzzy? Let’s look at some examples to help.

Let’s start with teaching a dog a new behavior such as “Sit.” I use the word I am teaching and lure the dog into a sit using a treat that I hold in front of the dog, then raising it up and possibly back over its head. If you have the dog’s attention and he follows the treat as most dogs do, he reaches back towards the treat and drops his rump to the floor to reach the treat. Bingo, a sit followed by a treat. If it doesn’t happen that way, I repeat and evaluate our next attempt. If we are successful the second time, we practice this method until the dog sits in anticipation of a treat reward. But if, the third time, he still goofs around, ignores me, or gets distracted or whatever he is doing to not sit, it is time to change my method.

My first change is usually a higher value treat, something that is smelly and new to the dog. I might also change training time to before meals, or if the dog is high-energy and easily distracted I may train after an exercise period outside. My best high-value treat for nonchalant or inattentive dogs is people food (i.e., chicken, cheese or hot dogs). These smelly delectables usually get a dog’s attention more easily and motivate him to work with me. It is rare that high-value treats don’t work, but once in a while I have to play with a dog to learn what motivates that dog.

I remember a Golden Retriever who needed remedial work in Tracking. Food didn’t work for him; he just wasn’t food motivated. So, after play sessions, to figure out what motivated him, I discovered his love of tennis balls. Once I discovered this motivator, I hid tennis balls in his final articles, running very short tracks to teach him where his tennis ball was hiding. When he reached his last article, I pulled out his tennis ball and celebrated big time. He loved it. Once he figured out what was waiting for him at the end of his track, I started adding distance and turns to his tracks until he was ready to certify for his TD. Once that association was well established, he tracked beautifully and earned all of his Tracking titles, including his Champion Tracker crown to boot. The secret here for me is finding a way to make this type of dog want to work.

There is another group of dogs that is difficult to motivate in this way. This group of dogs may need physical help to do a sit or down at first. Many of these dogs have had little opportunity to learn how to learn in their youth, and thus, need help to discover the rewards of working together. I praise these dogs wildly when we succeed and offer food (payment for work well done) which many don’t want at first, but will eventually buy into the training program and accept the rewards. I have witnessed these dogs change over time to become good team members. When working with this type of dog, I think the outcomes are much better when the dog learns to make his own decisions and comply rather than making the dog do an exercise by too much physical help. Dogs are much smarter and self-centered than most people realize, and if there isn’t a good reason for him to do what’s he told he may decide not to. I want the dogs I train to think that compliance is the best decision to make because of the rewards it reaps.

That said, once the dog is trained (which means you’re certain the dog knows what a command means), but you find that he is not sitting or heeling, etc., as cited above, our role changes from teacher to enforcer. Without this step, this dog becomes unreliable and may not follow commands. Without enforcing commands, dogs learn to do as they want rather than as they are told. If such were the case in human society, think of the decisions people would make should there be no consequences for making bad choices. Dogs are no different.

To revisit the example stated in the beginning of this piece, why would a two-year-old “trained” dog not heel to the line with his owner? Why would a three-year-old “trained” dog not sit still until released to retrieve? Simply stated, he or she has not had the right form of reinforcement to impress the dog that there is a consequence for making the wrong choice. Using the same correction repeatedly, despite no change in the dog’s behavior, is a failure on the part of the trainer to effectively communicate with his dog. The Rule of Three has helped me achieve the desired result of compliance with trained dogs once they have reached the point of being responsible for their own actions. So how would the Rule of Three work for the “trained” dog mentioned above to improve its heeling to the line in Field events?

The young “trained” dog mentioned above still has to be walked to the line for his retrieves on a pinch collar that is held tight by his handler. First mistake: the handler is doing the dog’s job for him, which means the dog takes no responsibility for his behavior.
This method of controlling the dog does not correct him nor teach him how to heel off-leash. Time to change something. And realize that since this has gone on for quite a while, changing behavior for this dog will probably take quite a bit of time.

Beginning with the mildest correction, one might try denial, which means get rid of the pinch collar and walk to the line off-leash without pulling me or you can’t play. So, each time the dog forges, I stop and backup telling the dog, “No, Heel.” If three tries of that method don’t register with the dog, I go back to the car and put him away. He may not get to retrieve at all that day. Too bad. I try that method at least three more times and if there is no change, I change my approach again.

At a subsequent training session, I repeat the same plan cited above. But if denial hasn’t motivated the dog to change behavior at this session, my next step is to start more aversive methods. An aversive method is determined by the sensitivity of the dog, not the thought of the tool being used. My choice is the electronic collar that has a vibration option as well as electrical stimulation, which is what I would do with this dog. I would stop his field work and go back to working on heeling off-leash at home. I would start with the vibrate mode, telling him to heel, and vibrate him whenever he forges ahead or leaves my side. I would be ready with treats and tons of praise when the dog stays close while heeling. He does not have to be perfect; I just want improvement. We can finesse things once he understands this concept. If he is all over the place, I might add a leash that he drags for me, to step on if he is just uncontrollable. If he is horrible, I would probably use the leash to help a little, but drop it as soon as he begins improving. I want this to be the dog’s job, not mine. I want him to understand that there is a consequence if he fails to stay with me. If this method doesn’t show some improvement in three different training sessions, I am going to change the consequence from collar vibrations to collar nicks so that he thinks the safest place to be is near me where there are no “bees.”

Electronic collars have a wide range of settings from which one can select. I always start with low intensity and increase slowly until the dog stays in heel position without my help.* He is only nicked when leaving my side, so the reward of heeling in correct position is no collar nicks. The idea is not to “fry” the poor dog for not working with you but to stimulate him just enough to get his attention and remind him that it is his responsibility to stay with me. The same method can be used for training in other sports, but I don’t see that done very much as the environment in Field events excites and distracts dogs with high drive much more than dogs in Obedience, Rally or Agility.

This is simply one example of how the Rule of Three can work to change a dog’s training plan to improve performance. One does not have to drop standards because of an irresponsible dog. Teach him his job and enforce your standards. Both of you will be
much happier.

*Electronic collars can be a very useful tool one can use to train dogs. However, used improperly, they can create unwanted misunderstandings and behaviors. If one is unfamiliar with how the collar works and yet thinks it may help with your training challenges, please seek guidance from someone experienced in electronic collar training methods.