'New' handling methods

The entire topic is just too much fun/ from the human psychology side/ not to be continued, seeing as entire agility community reacts to changes:biggrin2:
Here some more relevant blog posts
http://1stworlddog.com/2014/01/20/dog-blog-marketing-monday-when-marketing-comes-to-the-dog-world/
http://agilitypap.com/2014/01/20/discovery-mondays-learning-to-speak-dog/

Definitely interesting from the human psychology side. Especially so, since the first link in your post says exactly the same thing I've been saying in my posts -- the 'new' (but not really new) One Mind is more about branding and repackaging than offering truly innovative content. The second link is just more cheerleading about repackaging.

I just have to ask what is your point, exactly? Are you hoping that we'll all suddenly see the light, abandon our boring Derret or Mecklenburg, and join your quest after all things European and bright and shiny? I'm interested from a human psychology standpoint.
 
Until about 6 months ago I thought agility handling was just about running and pointing and the better handlers were faster runners and more accurate pointers than everyone else so not sure I'm qualified to pass comment! The discovery of different handling 'systems' (from posts on here) was exciting but also confusing.

You may recall I did a thread on handling systems in the autumn which had many very interesting responses. I don't want to be chopping and changing so I decided to learn as much as I can about different handling systems and take from each one things that I think will suit and leave off what doesn't feel right. Possibly that isn't the right approach but I've never found 'copy and paste' training to be very helpful. There can be so much variation and it seems silly to impose person A's methods wholesale when person B has a better approach to one thing and person C has a great technique for something else.

What I'm loving about agility is that it seems to be constantly evolving in the same way that mainstream sports do and that is so refreshing. I'm so excited to think that there will always be something new on the horizon to find out about - even if I don't want to actually put it into practice. :wink2:
 
Last edited:
Different names same moves !!

I think I agree with that statement 90%, or maybe 95%, or I don't know maybe even more than that... if chimpanzees share 96-98% of dna with humans then maybe OMD is closer to 99% in terms of matching up with existing systems.

Btw., I have heard that many in Europe do not consider OMD as European handling, but rather refer to it as Finnish handling, particularly considering that Finland is a relatively new member of the European Union & most Europeans older than 20 would have for the longest time considered Finland outside of Europe.

While I think most of OMD is a re-hash of ideas already in existence it does include within it a certain particular mindset that I'm not sure I can put in writing here. Again not wholly unique, but something I think that is key to understanding their branding of the system & I haven't yet fully digested it yet to come to a final conclusion.

What the first link in the recent posting goes on about that comes home to me is the "media blitz" I feel the OMD folks are involved in - the "branding".
Much like I am put off by a well-known handler from Canada who likes to sell, sell, sell, I am a bit uncomfortable with the sheer marketing effort that keeps coming through. I really don't need to find more ways to spend the limited $'s I have to pay folks that already have more resources & $'s or Euros than I will ever be able to dream of saving so long as I'm addicted to agility.
 
I read a blog post today that made some interesting observations about the new handling methods. I have to say I think the author makes some very valid observations.

http://jility.wordpress.com/2014/01/07/in-the-new-old-fashioned-way/

Love it! Don't get me wrong, I have worked on these moves lately because the courses are getting tighter and more technical and in order to be a competitor we have to have better time, but I don't subscribe to any of the fancy $5000 per class nutballs.

Perhaps some people don't like the article because it's not written by some famous(yet unknown by the normal population) Agility Guru :winkgrin:
 
What the first link in the recent posting goes on about that comes home to me is the "media blitz" I feel the OMD folks are involved in - the "branding".
Much like I am put off by a well-known handler from Canada who likes to sell, sell, sell, I am a bit uncomfortable with the sheer marketing effort that keeps coming through.

To be honest, they remind me of Pat Parelli in horses selling his natural horsemanship. He himself is a great horseman, but also a great marketer. He puts on lots of flashy shows to draw people in. With one mind, it's things like the videos of them running multiple dogs at once, and doing difficult things with them. With Parelli, it's stunts like walking his horses off lead through crowds with the horse(s) just following him, or taking a problem horse and supposedly fixing it in a few hours at his seminar (I know people who have tried to take horses, and he won't take just any horse. He takes the horses he knows he can lure people into buying). He is good at marketing his methods, which aren't necessarily new, but he is able to generate a lot of buzz over. People will rush out and buy their carrot sticks, and rope halters, and all of his dvds, and go to his seminars. People think his methods are the magic key to success. They aren't. You still have to be able to take the methods home, and put them to use. What people forget is that you still have to be able to learn to apply the methods successfully. If you already aren't great, chances are just changing the method won't make you great. Just like any other method, you have to put in the hard work to learn and grow and make yourself better at what you're doing.
 
Definitely interesting from the human psychology side. Especially so, since the first link in your post says exactly the same thing I've been saying in my posts -- the 'new' (but not really new) One Mind is more about branding and repackaging than offering truly innovative content. The second link is just more cheerleading about repackaging.

I just have to ask what is your point, exactly? Are you hoping that we'll all suddenly see the light, abandon our boring Derret or Mecklenburg, and join your quest after all things European and bright and shiny? I'm interested from a human psychology standpoint.

Some things never change:smile2: Here is great article by Karen Pryor, not about agility but about different topic- clickers, must have turned the world upside down some time ago too and look where are we now:smile2:
http://www.clickertraining.com/node/157
 
Possibly that isn't the right approach but I've never found 'copy and paste' training to be very helpful. There can be so much variation and it seems silly to impose person A's methods wholesale when person B has a better approach to one thing and person C has a great technique for something else.

What I'm loving about agility is that it seems to be constantly evolving in the same way that mainstream sports do and that is so refreshing. I'm so excited to think that there will always be something new on the horizon to find out about - even if I don't want to actually put it into practice. :wink2:

It's taken only a few days for me to realise this sounds a bit arrogant. :o
What I was trying to say was that because I've learned (through discussions here) about different methods it would be hard to just pick one. It was doing obedience that made me try alternative approaches as most methods focussed on what worked for GSDs and BCs but not helpful with other breeds. Since then I've sort of got into the habit of trying to have a 'toolbox' of alternatives. Epic is so different to my other shelties that I've spent a lot of time looking for training methods that will work for him. :smile2:
 
Having a velcro dog, it makes you realize that a lot of training is aimed at the obstacle-focused dog. That being said.......

After reading the article, I thought to myself. Why did this experienced handler just accept what the trainer was telling them and change their ways? Why didn't they think about what was good for their dog. I mean, they are experienced enough to know better, but yet, the author just became a sheep and did what the trainer told them to do. Seems a bit sad.

Maybe it's because with Koji, I know I made a ton of mistakes and he was not easy. He's easy enough to train, but I had to figure out why the regular training wasn't working. And when I figured it out, I realized, oh, he kinda learns differently.

I know, when I started with a new trainer (twice now), I looked to see if they were on the same page with me. That all dogs are the same and should be trained the same. That I don't need to learn the newest handling techniques if it's not really going to do anything for me. Teach me the new things, so I, as a handler can learn, HOWEVER, let's decide together if it's worth it to really train my dog to understand a "new" handling technique. Or is he better off doing it the "old" way?

For example. The blind cross. Since Koji has a bad habit of going behind me (my fault in training, not his), doing blind crosses a lot really adds to him wanting to cut behind me. I learned that the hard way. Had we thought really thought about it, me and/or the trainer, we would have realized training a BC isn't a bad thing.....but we needed to fix him going behind me first.

So with that. I disliked that article a lot. It showed me that the author was just a mindless sheep, doing what the trainer said. I love learning new things, but I usually discuss it with the trainer to first see if it'll make any of Koji's bad habits worse. No? Good. Then we discuss if it'll add to his agility. Yes? Let's train. No? As a handler, I'd like to learn it, but not put it into his repertoire of tricks.

I also disliked the bit about walking off. I'm sorry, but no matter how much proof work you do, being in the ring is different. We all know it. Sometimes, some dogs NEED to be walked off to be reminded what they did wrong, because we can't train in the rings. Heck, we sometimes can't even correct our dogs in the ring (in a firm voice). I picked up my dog too roughly according to one judge and was warned. Wow. Really? Point is. Some dogs needed it. Koji did. And wow did it work!

That's my long rant. Maybe it's due to Koji's weirdness. But I've learned to find a trainer that likes to learn new things, keeps up with what is going on, but doesn't push it on everyone. I also learned to find a trainer that trains each team differently, because each team is different. I also have learned to stand up for what I believe in. I will listen, I will learn, but in the end, it's my decision. I will do what is best for the team....in all areas.
 
For example. The blind cross. Since Koji has a bad habit of going behind me (my fault in training, not his), doing blind crosses a lot really adds to him wanting to cut behind me. I learned that the hard way. Had we thought really thought about it, me and/or the trainer, we would have realized training a BC isn't a bad thing.....but we needed to fix him going behind me first.
I do not have anything better on my drive, but watch my head. This is the only difference why Leo cuts behind me or follows my lead. If you watch path on the ground where you expect your dog to be, Koji will not cut behind you:biggrin2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT5xkbV1MKQ
 
Back
Top