Handling systems????

I honestly have no clue about handling systems. I do whatever my trainers teach and I have no idea if they follow a system or not. :lol: I think you just have to run your dogs however you're comfortable and make calls based on yours and their abilities. I'm open to whatever works and don't want to rule anything out.
 
k9kreationz said:
And honestly, that's my advice to people. Find a system to learn foundation. But as you grow as a team, adjust what you need to, to make it work for you. I know with Koji, he's always been one of those dogs that do things differently and confuse me. LOL.

I started out hardcore Derrett. But now, I just learn whatever works for us. If Koji doesn't seem to get or like something new, we try it a different way. If that other way works well, I go with it.
Click to expand...

THIS is pretty much it in a nutshell.

I remember when Cheryl and I were discussing handling systems offline shortly after she took the Daisy Peel class and what she says here sums up our hour+ long discussion in a few elegant sentences.

Handling systems, regardless of which one you follow, provide a great foundation and consistent method for working with your dog. As you gain experience you need to be willing to break away from the rules of a handing system and do whatever is necessary to provide clear, precise and fast information to our canine partner.
 
Hey you just know I'm going to ask :wink2: - what is motion based handling? Everyone looks in motion when they're doing agility...:lol:

I think that's probably what I'll do when I have more experience. Certainly with obedience training I've discovered that you have to be flexible and to an extent, the dog's individual persona determines the path of training. I don't like seeing dogs being put under pressure from a method which doesn't suit them simply because the trainer only knows/accepts one way of doing things. From what I've seen so far though, agility trainers seem to be much more adaptable and open minded to learning new methods which is lovely. :smile2: It will help a lot to have an established agility handling system to learn and build on as my knowledge and experience (hopefully) improves. It's great leaning not only how to do something but the reason for doing it like that. One of the things I've liked when reading Dawn Weaver's book is she suggests different approaches for small and large dogs, motivated and less motivated ones and explains why one way of doing things might not necessarily suit every situation.
 
Last edited:
seashel said:
Hey you just know I'm going to ask :wink2: - what is motion based handling? Everyone looks in motion when they're doing agility...:lol:
Click to expand...

I'm sure someone can explain it better than I can but...

A motion based system works on the idea that dogs respond best to the handler's motion rather than verbal cues. I've actually played an agility training game called Mute Agility where the idea is to run your dog without saying anything. In more cases than not the dogs run BETTER when the handler is silent and focuses on their motion.

If a handler is running forward quickly, that's a cue to the dog that you are moving forward in a straight line. If the handler slows down, that's a collection cue. Turning your shoulders will cue a push or pull. The key to the system is to always be ahead of the dog.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for explaining that Silaria. :smile2:

I'm guessing then that the European style is motion based then?

What you say about verbal cues is really interesting. In the last couple of months I've stopped saying 'over, over, over' for every jump. I watched one of my training videos back and it just sounded like white noise when the jumps were coming fast. I changed to only giving calling and obstacle cues and kind of presumed that if I ran him at a line of jumps he would figure I wanted him to jump them! Losing the chit chat did seem to make Epic sharper and more focussed on my body language cues - which would be great except that they were probably 90% inaccurate. :uhoh:

Looking back over our last month of shows I believe that one reason for Epic running out in the middle of some of the courses was that the information he was getting from me was nill. I took away the verbal cues which at least gave him some kind of hint as to what was coming and left him with no useful information at all. Me bad! :no:

However I did realise this before the last show and decided to use the 'over' command in places where Epic needed a bit more support eg on turns. This really did make a difference because he wasn't hearing 'over' for every jump enough to tune out but if I did say it then he was looking on for the jump where I was vaguely pointing.

Some people I know have trained heavily for verbal directional commands so they can send their dog left or right from behind or laterally. I can see the value of this on the type of courses I've seen, where it would be very difficult to get in position in front of the dog. One of my winter projects is teaching Epic his right and left and retraining on cik/cap wraps. Even if I don't need it much for agility it still strikes me as a useful skill for a dog to have. :smile2:

We've also started doing shadow handling as warm up/warm down thing and I do this all silently. It's something we both really enjoy and basically fun way to start of finish a session. I confess I've really had my eyes opened as to how closely dogs observe our body language and pick up on minute clues. It's almost telepathic.
 
Per Linda Mecklenburg, the logic behind a motion based system is that it is based on natural tendencies that our dogs already have. Think of this, if you run and then come to a stop on course, what does your dog do? They turn into you and stop. If you stand still, facing a jump with your dog on your right and ask them to jump, what do they do? Take the jump and turn into you, not away from you.

Verbals are all trained cues. While they are a great supplement, they will typically (without rigorous training) be trumped by motion if your cues are contradictory.
 
corbinam said:
Verbals are all trained cues. While they are a great supplement, they will typically (without rigorous training) be trumped by motion if your cues are contradictory.
Click to expand...

And in my case, ALWAYS trumped by motion cues. Edan is so super sensitive to my motion that I can pull him off of ANYTHING by moving even the slightest bit too early. :lol:
 
Helps and Face can probably provide more info on european systems such as one mind. I believe their systems utilize a lot more trained skills.
Ashley explained a motion based system well. Better than I could.
 
APHS system has 6 basic cues where Motion is the king.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o3NG0EYg3g
GD system has set of fairly rigid rules which are very clear and thus likable to the beginner, rely heavily of position/location as well as acceleration/deceleration. When things start changing any rigid system has a little give...
APHS system might be a bit more complicated for the beginner to figure out that balance of the cues but is more flexible for the changes. So there is pro and cons everywhere.
Here is my take away from one of the class. Imagine straight line my dog going down the middle of the jumps, at 0.16- 0.18 you see me moving/ pushing into my dog's line as result he takes off jump. Che is and always has been super sensitive to my motion, another dog might not take the jump but just be confused by your ambiguous handling cues.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HX7xTI5rvb0
I like having and learning one system in depth so I have answers to my WHY's, part of my personality needs to know :smile2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top