nadac #6

Heartily disagree- most dogs rely on waist down part of the body i.e. motion is the king. Since in this set up forward motion will be cuing both obstacles it is up to secondary cues to make it happen.

It's okay if you disagree, but experiment with it yourself first. Different dogs tend to depend on different cues - which is why one training "system" doesn't fit all dogs. With the main group of competitive dogs I train with, 3 rely on shoulders, one relies on hands, and one relies on hand movement. None rely on movement from the waist down, and none rely exclusively on voice - voice is a secondary cue and a "back up system". This is a great advantage for distance work, because it doesn't matter where my feet are headed, as long as my shoulders are pointed towards the obstacle I want them to take, they're fine. This is why some of the best NADAC handlers can achieve such spectacular distance, with minimal vocal signals and minimal movement - if motion was the king, they wouldn't be able to do this.

Also consider how much dogs rely on body language to provide information about their handlers and other dogs, vs. how much they rely on vocal information. Obviously they rely far much on body language, so wouldn't it make sense that this extends into agility? As humans, we tend to rely on verbal information, and try to extend that to our dogs instead of accepting that they rely far more on body language, and using that to our advantage.

At least once per training session, we run courses with absolutely no verbal signals allowed - try it yourself - it's AMAZING how much better our dogs run without the verbal cues. Try it yourself a few times - it's lots of fun, and will really force you to reconsider how you handle your dog. I sure learned a lot from it :wink2:
 
How fun! Even though Dixie took the tunnel in that first run for an NQ, I thought the rest of the run was great! She drove ahead and knew right where to go.

Really cute pix with the ribbons, too!
 
It's okay if you disagree, but experiment with it yourself first. Different dogs tend to depend on different cues - which is why one training "system" doesn't fit all dogs. With the main group of competitive dogs I train with, 3 rely on shoulders, one relies on hands, and one relies on hand movement. None rely on movement from the waist down, and none rely exclusively on voice - voice is a secondary cue and a "back up system". This is a great advantage for distance work, because it doesn't matter where my feet are headed, as long as my shoulders are pointed towards the obstacle I want them to take, they're fine. This is why some of the best NADAC handlers can achieve such spectacular distance, with minimal vocal signals and minimal movement - if motion was the king, they wouldn't be able to do this.

Also consider how much dogs rely on body language to provide information about their handlers and other dogs, vs. how much they rely on vocal information. Obviously they rely far much on body language, so wouldn't it make sense that this extends into agility? As humans, we tend to rely on verbal information, and try to extend that to our dogs instead of accepting that they rely far more on body language, and using that to our advantage.

At least once per training session, we run courses with absolutely no verbal signals allowed - try it yourself - it's AMAZING how much better our dogs run without the verbal cues. Try it yourself a few times - it's lots of fun, and will really force you to reconsider how you handle your dog. I sure learned a lot from it :wink2:

Beginner dog will not take a jump unless handler either moves forward with the dog or recalls dog over the jump. Experienced dog will take a jump on a verbal cue alone. Dogs relying on different parts of hands or verbal cues are trained commands specific to particular dog/handler combination and specific training whether it was intentional or not. Most dogs will naturally follow your body motion from the waist down, they can be trained to respond to variety of other cues depending on whatever one chooses, Stuart Mah with completely independent verbals or Amanda Nelson with distance work from square...
I admit, I am brainwashed:wink2: There is fantastic article link reprinted from CR by Linda http://agilitynerd.com/blog/agility/glossary/Cue.html
While I do not do it as often I am routinely encouraged to run silent without verbals as well as run ¨penguin style¨with hands in the pockets. I agree it is great fun and eye opener.
 
Sorry - we got this thread off track. I stand by my advice, and if you want to discuss cues in more detail I'd participate in a separate thread.

In the meantime - sorry CalliesMom - I still think you had great runs :-).
 
Sorry - we got this thread off track. I stand by my advice, and if you want to discuss cues in more detail I'd participate in a separate thread.

In the meantime - sorry CalliesMom - I still think you had great runs :-).

thanks again- we had fun and that's what really counts:smile2:
I was very happy with how they did this weekend:yes:
we have some things to work on but when don't we?:winkgrin:
 
Back
Top