Indirect pressure

For discussion on anything retrieving related - trialing, training equipment, news, etc.

Moderator: Peter Butterfield

Indirect pressure

Postby M&J » Wed 24 Sep 2003 3:38 pm

Hi all

There has been much debate of late on an American forum concerning the application of indirect pressure (IP) with an e-collar. An example given was that of when a dog veered off the line given. In this case the handler would command the dog to sit, "nick" with the collar and then command sit again (ie. sit, nick, sit).
Essentially, I am interested in knowing what method of IP is applied amongst those who use an e-collar here in Australia.
Force fetch is simply a matter of showing the dog how to turn off the pressure but I don't understand how the dog would associate the above application of IP with his/her error (ie. deviating off the line). Or is it simply a matter of consistency in its application that the dog learns to associate the IP with its mistake or lack of effort and not the sit?

Curious as to what other handlers think.

Many thanks

Mark
M&J
 

IP

Postby Kirsty Blair » Wed 24 Sep 2003 11:36 pm

Hi Mark,

I've had an experienced handler try to explain this to me and I've read about it extensively on the internet but I still don't see how it works. I have always assumed that the dog would view the correction as being for the last thing it did ie the sit, not the incorrect line or disobeyed cast.

Anyway, I too would love to hear any further explanation and views on this.

Kirsty
Kirsty Blair
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2003 7:41 pm
Location: Hawkesbury, NSW

Postby K Normanl » Sat 27 Sep 2003 12:16 am

Indirect pressure is used when a dog is being willfully disobedient. The dog MUST know what the "correct" behavior is to use indirect pressure.

It is NOT used just because a dog veers off line. You would simply handle back on-line. A chronic cast refusal, however, would merit a "sit"-nick-"sit" (get your head into the game bozo).

Example: A few days ago I was running water blinds with my female. One of the blinds skimmed past a point on the right about 12 feet (approx. 4 meters?) off the tip. She steamed past it no problem and picked up the bird. On her return she veered toward the point to dock...even though she knew better than to cheat. We have completed down the shore cheating singles and point cheating.

I said "no", sit tweet, left over cast, off the point....she stopped but refused the cast and kept going to the point...again, "NO", sit tweet, left over...again, she sat but a refusal to take the left over cast. Ah ha!!! She knows better!!!!!! "NO" sit tweet, nick, sit tweet...I let her tread water for 4 or 5 seconds to watch me cast, then the left over again....she got it right this time. And most importantly, she never got a chance to get on that point.


BTW....Hi Julie!!!!!! Glad you had a good time visiting us, feel free to visit in Louisiana for a UKC hunt test when you come back!!!! :)
K Normanl
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri 25 Jul 2003 7:35 am

IP

Postby Kirsty Blair » Sat 27 Sep 2003 11:00 am

Hi Cat,

Thanks for an excellent explanation. The alternative method I've read about for the situation you described with your bitch is to let the dog get to the point and nick it as soon as it touches the land. You would then cast the dog back into the water with your Left Over. I guess this would be "hotspotting" the land rather than correcting for cast refusal (?).

Do you think that the IP method is better because the dog never gets to the land in the first place?

If this is the case, without use of the ecollar (they're illegal in NSW), are you better to correct the dog for cheating water as it goes to get out (ie give the dog a physical correction as it gets onto the bank)or prevent the dog from getting out of the water at all (have someone walk along the edge of the water as a deterrant)?

I'm just a newbie to this so forgive my ignorance!

Kirsty
Kirsty Blair
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2003 7:41 pm
Location: Hawkesbury, NSW

Postby Mark Sewell » Sun 28 Sep 2003 10:22 pm

What a fantastic explanation Cat!
Last edited by Mark Sewell on Mon 21 Mar 2005 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Sewell
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat 19 Apr 2003 12:26 am
Location: Sorrento WA

Postby K Normanl » Tue 30 Sep 2003 1:30 am

Goldy,

Whatever works best for that particular dog. However, I think IP is better because the dog is listening and reacting directly to YOU and not some hotspot on shore you create, even though the dog understands the correction is coming from you.

Your question about non-collar use is a difficult one and really highlights why systematic and fair use of an e-collar is so valuable.

Generally, we use a combination of attrition and pressure to get results. Attrition is repeating a command over and over until pup gets it right without pressure. Attrition is very effective in water since they are trying to stay afloat and important because you give pup a chance to succeed without correction.

It is also VERY important to remember that the collar IS NOT used to TEACH a command but rather to ENFORCE that command which has already been taught to a properly collar conditioned dog.

In your situation I'm not sure what I would do. Probably use attrition and have someone on the shore. BUT, I would make EXTRA sure my handling program was rock solid and would also gradually increase the difficulty of the cheating scenarios. Build the cheating lessons up from the ground floor as it were (even more slowly than when using a collar). Don't forget to lace up your running shoes and to move up and handle in pup's face if you have to.

BTW, sometimes dogs will be dogs anyway. I ran a water triple with a blind up the middle yesterday and while she marked the birds well she cheated two of the marks and the blind very badly. Guess what???...Indirect Pressure doesn't work if the handler forgets to turn on the e-collar. :oops: :roll: :oops:
K Normanl
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri 25 Jul 2003 7:35 am


Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests

cron